The Assembly met at noon (Mr Speaker in the Chair).
Members observed two minutes’ silence.

New Assembly Member

Mr Speaker: I have been advised by the Chief Electoral Officer that Mr Michael Coyle has been returned as a Member of the Assembly for the East Londonderry constituency, filling the vacancy left by the resignation of Mr Arthur Doherty. I invite Mr Coyle to take his seat by signing the Roll of Members.
The following Member signed the Roll: Mr Michael Coyle.

Mr Speaker: I am satisfied that the Member has signed the Roll and confirmed his designation.

Royal Assent

Mr Speaker: I wish to inform the House that the Budget (No.2) Bill has received Royal Assent. The Budget (No.2) Act (Northern Ireland) 2002 became law on 12 August 2002. Royal Assent has also been received for the Railway Safety Bill. The Railway Safety Act (Northern Ireland) 2002 became law on 13 August 2002.

Re-Designation letters

Mr Speaker: I wish to advise the House that on 4 September 2002 I received separate correspondence from Ms Monica McWilliams and Ms Jane Morrice advising that, in accordance with Standing Order 3(8), they wish to change their respective designations to "Other". I remind the House that a change in designation notified in writing to the Speaker takes immediate effect.

Mr Ian Paisley Jnr: On a point of order, Mr Speaker, it would be helpful if you would inform the House what the Members’ designation is now. Are they Unionists, Nationalists, Others, or just rescuers of whatever party is in trouble?

Mr Speaker: I have already advised the House that those Members wish to change their respective designations to "Other".

Public Petition

Mr Speaker: Mr Ian Paisley Jnr has begged leave to present a public petition in accordance with Standing Order 22.

Mr Ian Paisley Jnr: I beg leave to present to the Assembly a petition signed by 38 people who are residents of Tardree Grove in my constituency. The petition states that
"residents fail to comprehend how widening the road will alleviate the volume of speeding traffic which uses the route as a shortcut to the dual carriageway and call for the installation of speed restriction ramps as a more permanent solution to this on-going problem."
Mr Paisley Jnr moved forward and laid the petition on the Table.

Mr Speaker: I will forward the petition to the Minister for Regional Development and a copy to the Chairperson of the Committee for Regional Development.

North/South Ministerial Council: Trade and Business Development

Mr Speaker: I have received notice that the Minister of Enterprise, Trade and Investment wishes to make a statement on the North/South Ministerial Council sectoral meeting on trade, held on 26June 2002 in Belfast.

Sir Reg Empey: With your permission, Mr Speaker, I wish to make a statement on the seventh meeting of the North/South Ministerial Council in its Trade and Business Development sectoral format, which took place in the Europa Hotel, Belfast on Wednesday 26 June 2002.
Ms Carmel Hanna and I represented the Northern Ireland Administration. The Irish Government were represented by Ms Mary Harney, TD, Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment. This report has been approved by Ms Hanna and is also made on her behalf.
The Council considered a ‘Digital Island’ discussion paper, covering information and communications technologies and discussed a policy structure to determine the priorities necessary to exploit the potential that digital technologies can offer in support of increased trade and business development. The Council approved the establishment of a steering group to take the work forward and asked that a progress report be prepared for its next meeting.
The Council considered and noted the work currently being undertaken by InterTradeIreland in the field of science and technology and acknowledged the importance of that work for increasing job creation and economic development. The Council considered the European Union dimension to extended collaboration in this area and discussed the potential for enhanced North/South co-operation in science and technology through a variety of EU programmes such as the science, technology and innovation awareness programme, the European Space Agency and EUREKA — a pan-European network for market-orientated industrial research and development.
The Council asked InterTradeIreland, in conjunction with Departments and agencies, to examine the feasibility of further North/South co-operation and, jointly with Departments, to provide a report for the next meeting on the potential of specific co-operation opportunities.
The Council considered and approved a framework operating plan 2003 for InterTradeIreland. The main activities outlined in the plan included business and economic research, promotion of North/South science and technology research, ICT and e-commerce initiatives, the promotion of North/South institution and business alliances, the development of an all-island business model, knowledge transfer and the promotion of private equity. The Council asked InterTradeIreland to develop this framework plan and produce a final operating plan for 2003 for Council approval.
The Council considered and approved InterTradeIreland’s proposals for the introduction and operation of a performance appraisal system for its employees. The system will introduce modern public sector human resources policy to InterTradeIreland by linking the role and performance of employees to the broader objectives of the body as outlined in its operating plan.
The Council approved the publication of InterTradeIreland’s annual report and accounts for the year ended 31 December 2001. Copies of that report will be laid before the Houses of the Northern Ireland Assembly and the Irish Parliament.
The Council received a verbal report from the chief executive of InterTradeIreland on the progress made on implementing the body’s work programme. The chief executive updated the Council on recent achievements, such as the equity network programme, which arranged several equity workshops around the island, and a major private equity conference in Belfast in April. Business forums were held in numerous venues around the island, which raised awareness of important issues, including taxation, employment law and the support available from public sector development agencies. The Council will meet again in this sectoral format in Dublin on 1 November 2002.
(Mr Deputy Speaker [Mr J Wilson] in the Chair)

Mr Sean Neeson: I thank the Minister for the statement and congratulate him on the successful outcome of last week’s Washington conference. Will he elaborate on the details of the draft operating plan for 2003 for InterTradeIreland and particularly on the development of an all-Ireland business model, knowledge transfer and the promotion of private equity?

Sir Reg Empey: This is an outline of the main elements that are likely to be included in the draft operating plan, which will come before the autumn meeting of the North/South Ministerial Council (NSMC) for consideration and approval. Other agencies and Departments will be consulted fully to ensure that the proposals do not duplicate what is already available. There is little point in programmes in the different jurisdictions duplicating one another. The key focus of the body is to promote trade and business. I have drawn Members’ attention to the huge potential for companies in each jurisdiction to benefit from public procurement. There are public procurement contracts worth between £7·5 billion and £10 billion on the island, and only a comparatively small percentage of that trade is won by companies in Northern Ireland. Our companies should have full access to public procurement in the Republic and vice versa.
The operating plan must take account of the way in which we are able to make progress with these concepts and implement them, because the objective is to enable trade to grow. We also wish to develop e-business so that companies, and small companies in particular, that are located in border areas are able to grow. We wish to encourage that policy throughout Northern Ireland, but it has a particular cross-border dimension.
We wish to deal with a range of issues, but I stress that the Assembly will be able to debate the full operating plan. It must be subject to approval, and I hope that as the company matures, we will be better placed to measure the increased trade and business development that it achieves.

Dr Esmond Birnie: I thank the Minister for his statement. I note his comments about exploiting the potential of digital technologies to promote trade. Has the NSMC in this sectoral format considered evidence on the percentage of companies in Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland that have constructed web sites as a marketing tool?

Sir Reg Empey: Yes. One of the Council’s proposals is to develop portals where people can have access to information, and we must be aware that, under the auspices of the British-Irish Council, work is being done to improve communication and co-operation for building the knowledge economy. What is happening here is entirely consistent with, and complementary to, that approach. The improvement and extension of e-business and e-government is a Programme for Government commitment; we must set an example. There is the opportunity to promote the development of all-island trade via e-business, and the digital island programme would include proposals from either jurisdiction which could achieve that. I support the concept that the Member has suggested.

Dr Alasdair McDonnell: I congratulate the Minister and my Colleague, Carmel Hanna, the Minister for Employment and Learning, for the significant reduction in unemployment that has taken place over the past few years. I have no doubt that cross-border activity significantly contributes to job creation and has increased — [Interruption].

Mr Patrick Roche: Absolute nonsense.

Mr Jim Wilson: Order.

Dr Alasdair McDonnell: Mr Deputy Speaker, I hear a noise in the wilderness. Can he be removed from the wilderness, or can the wilderness be removed from him?

Mr Jim Wilson: Order. If the call had been from the wilderness I would not have called a point of order. The call was from the House, which makes it a point of order. The Member is entitled to be heard.

Dr Alasdair McDonnell: Before I was so rudely interrupted I wanted to say that I am aware that much bureaucracy and inhibitory factors have to be dealt with and negotiated before we can get full benefit from the North/South negotiations.
I am concerned about the digital island issue. We talk a great deal about e-government — much more so within Northern Ireland Departments — but as the ‘Digital Island’ discussion paper suggests, e-government affects the North/South dimension. I am frustrated by the inability of our Departments to get to grips with, and exploit, modern communication technology.

Mr Jim Wilson: Order. Is there a question?

Dr Alasdair McDonnell: Will the ‘Digital Island’ discussion paper do anything more than pay lip-service and, if so, what tangible results will we see within three years?

Sir Reg Empey: We have asked a working group to produce specific proposals, and its report will be available to us at our next meeting. In response to an earlier question I said that we are trying to promote the development of trade by e-business. It is not rocket science: it is a perfectly sensible thing to be doing, and it has potential. However, we must ensure that we are operating in an environment that is not going to separate us further from the wider market. Consequently, the British-Irish Council has taken up the matter also. Work is ongoing on a North/ South and east-west basis, which is entirely appropriate.
We will be reviewing the report of the working group in the next few months. My next report to the House on the matter will give the Member an opportunity to judge whether there is simply more bureaucracy or whether the specific proposals will achieve something within three years. If the Member would hold his fire until he sees the report after the next meeting, he should be better able to make a judgement then.

Mr Jim Wells: My Colleague, Mr Neeson, referred to the Washington summit, and I assume that there will be a statement to the House or the Committee on the outcome of that important meeting.
As regards digital technology, there is one issue that the Minister has not yet been able to come to grips with. Roaming charges might seem to be a small issue, but it gets up the noses of many people in south Down. If the North/South Ministerial Council is serious about dealing with the problems of digital technology, can the Minister understand the anger of someone living in Rostrevor or Warrenpoint who regularly finds that Republic of Ireland telephone companies are deliberately beaming strong signals into south Down? Mobile phone users are being forced to use their network to make and, even worse, receive telephone calls, and they are then faced with huge telephone bills at the end of the month. While travelling from Kilkeel to Newry, I regularly receive two or three text messages welcoming me to the Irish Republic when I have not even set foot inside it. [Interruption]. Recently, one of my Colleagues received a bill for £1·50 for three text messages that welcomed him to the Irish Republic — and he had not even left Kilkeel. When will the Minister’s Department get together with its counterpart in the Irish Republic to tell it to stop beaming these signals into Northern Ireland so that we can avoid incurring roaming charges?

Sir Reg Empey: Despite the hilarity in the Chamber, there is a serious point in Mr Wells’s comments — if one can only find it. Telecommunications is a reserved matter and is the responsibility of the Department of Trade and Industry in London and its counterpart in the Republic.
The issue of roaming charges was raised at the last meeting of the British-Irish Council, when we pointed out that it is a double-edged sword. Signals are also beamed in the opposite direction — from Wales into the Republic, for example. Signals have a habit of crossing all sorts of borders. I am happy to take the Member’s advice, and I will consult further with my Colleague across the border on how these matters may be addressed.

Dr Dara O'Hagan: Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. There is an argument for all-Ireland harmonisation of mobile phone networks. That would do away with the problem, given that it is the same country.
How far advanced and how formalised are InterTradeIreland’s contacts with all economic development agencies on the island of Ireland, including Invest Northern Ireland (INI), the Industrial Development Agency (IDA), Enterprise Ireland and a range of smaller, less well-known economic agencies?

Sir Reg Empey: InterTradeIreland has arranged and facilitated several meetings. Some organisations had never met before. However, these are free-standing organisations, and it is up to them to determine how often and with whom they meet. We cannot dictate. Several organisations identified the advantages of receiving supplies from companies located a few miles down the road. Previously, they had had no knowledge of the products that those companies sold. The potential also exists for import substitution. If businesses can shorten their supply lines, they can reduce stocks and become more efficient. Anything that can be done in rural areas to ensure that people start to build trade between one another is to our benefit.
The bulk of our trade is with Great Britain, and the other largest markets are the United States and the Irish Republic. Anything that can be done to boost trade and relationships is to be welcomed. As Mr Wells stated, I was in Washington last week, and I will consider how I might best inform Colleagues about that visit.
InterTradeIreland has run a series of roadshows. It meets regularly with the agencies, but it recognises that the agencies are free-standing and have their own remit. InterTradeIreland acts as a facilitator to raise awareness of the economic and social benefits of doing business with companies that are close at hand. One of InterTradeIreland’s tasks is to encourage and boost that trade, thereby creating and securing jobs close to home. That function is at the core of InterTradeIreland’s existence. However, it cannot dictate how people should conduct their business. It can only facilitate and encourage businesses, and it is doing so effectively.

Ms Jane Morrice: I was interested in the Minister’s response to the previous question about how to boost trade on this island. He will not be surprised by my question. If InterTradeIreland is focusing on the promotion of trade and business, why was the euro not mentioned in the deliberations? Surely the introduction of the euro here would be the best and only way to boost trade. What are the practical outworkings of the currency differential for InterTradeIreland? The Minister said that we will be submitting joint bids to the European Union for the EUREKA programme, et cetera. Will those bids be in euros or sterling, and, on a practical level, are InterTradeIreland staff paid in euros or pounds?

Sir Reg Empey: I would never have guessed that the Member would raise that issue. Ms Morrice knows my views on the euro; I have repeated them several times in the House, and I am happy to do so again. I am working on the assumption that sterling will remain the currency of this country for the foreseeable future. I do not believe that the people of the United Kingdom wish to vote themselves into the single currency, so I do not envisage that happening in the immediate future.
However, the issue is not as simple as the Member says it is. Some businesses benefit from having sterling as their currency. Businesses using sterling to buy raw materials in the euro zone, or those that buy with a strong currency in international markets and sell into the dollar zone — as many of our businesses do — do better than those trading in euros.
If 12, 15 or 20 nations are brought together under a single currency, as proposed, not all of their economies will be compatible within a broader macroeconomy. They will not work at the same speed, nor will they have the same degree of development. It is not necessarily acceptable that the blunt instrument of a single interest rate should be used to control the money supply in those economies. Recently, for instance, the German economy would have benefited from a lower interest rate, but the Irish economy should have had a higher interest rate. The result is inflation.
It is horses for courses: some of our companies would benefit from being in the euro zone because the differential would no longer exist. The value of the euro has improved. However, the problem is not that sterling is overvalued; the euro is undervalued because it was created for political reasons. Some of the countries admitted into the single currency should not have been permitted to join. Some have already broken the rules, including Germany, one of the major economies, which cannot meet its targets on budget deficits. Despite that, nothing will happen; the issue will be fudged around. That is why the euro is undervalued; people do not trust that it will be treated equally for economic reasons.
The staff of InterTradeIreland are paid in sterling. I stand to be corrected, but I understand that any European bids submitted to Brussels, including those to the peace and reconciliation fund, are converted into euros.

Mr Eugene McMenamin: I thank the Minister for his statement, and I look forward to the publication of the ‘Digital Island’ discussion paper. Recent research shows that a major digital divide exists in Northern Ireland: 53% of citizens aged 16 and over do not have access to the Internet. I call on the Minister and his Department to address that by providing financial aid for the areas of most need, especially west Tyrone.

Sir Reg Empey: Oh dear. Team west Tyrone strikes again. I am conscious of the serious point that the Member has made. There is a digital divide, and we are aware of it. My Department is running several schemes to try to ensure that businesses, including those in west Tyrone, do not suffer from geographic isolation. We are running a scheme under which small businesses can apply for grant aid to get broadband Internet access via satellite. That is a way of ensuring an alternative for businesses that are too far away to have a cable service. We hope to connect 200 businesses in the current round, and I will be happy to let the Member know how many have been connected and how many are in his constituency. It is important to note that people must apply for that grant.
Furthermore, my Department has five advisers who go around the client base of Invest Northern Ireland, talk to businesses and draw their attention to the benefits that can be gained from broadband. In Invest Northern Ireland’s Lisburn office, all the technologies are on display. People can go to see them at work and receive advice on them.
The Department is technology-neutral. We do not say that one technology is good or that another technology is not good. It is a question of providing people with examples and showing them how they work. There is a great deal of traffic in that office, and we are trying to promote it.
The Member’s question goes beyond pure business. As a community, we must take the wider social issue seriously. Some countries, such as the Republic and America, have been more successful than others at increasing the number of people involved. There is a pilot project in inner-city Belfast that plans to connect several people in this way, because there are wider issues. However, our priority has been to get businesses connected, and the Department is running several schemes designed to encourage that.

Mr Ian Paisley Jnr: The Minister referred to the ‘Digital Island’ discussion paper. Before we get to that point, Members remain to be convinced about digital Northern Ireland. The Minister knows that broadband and Bluetooth technologies are essential for the future development of Northern Ireland. Will he consider extending the availability of those services to rural communities in my constituency, such as Cullybackey, Ahoghill, Dervock and Stranocum, which are currently denied access to that network and are, therefore, denied any new incentive for employment? Will the Minister focus on the resolution of that issue before spending money on the bigger picture, which is less important than resolving Northern Ireland’s own difficulties?

Sir Reg Empey: There is no question of people being denied access. A variety of technologies is available for broadband. I have just told Mr McMenamin that we are running a scheme under which people can apply for a grant of up to £1,500 or 50% of the cost of installation of a satellite-based broadband facility. The grant also includes a contribution to the first year’s running costs.
Any business in any of the areas that the Member mentioned can apply to the Department. It will be visited by a departmental official and its suitability assessed, and a grant can be paid. Anyone in business in the Member’s constituency has access to a scheme to enable the provision of broadband. This is specifically aimed at the type of rural situation to which Mr Paisley Jnr referred, where there is no reasonably priced access to cable.
One of the biggest encouragements for the companies to roll out their cabling and other facilities is "aggregation of demand". If the Member can encourage clusters of those involved in district councils, hospitals or schools — areas where there is a potential demand for broadband — to aggregate their demand to one of the companies, the company will then have the incentive to put the infrastructure in place. The Department is trying to do that locally through working with all the district councils.
That point also has cross-border application. In rural areas, particularly around the border, there may not be enough demand on one side, but if the demand on both sides were added together, both sides would benefit. That is the rationale for aggregating the demand and encouraging the cross-border element. That can help Northern Ireland because, on its own, its rural areas will not generate sufficient demand to stimulate the companies to put in the infrastructure.
Another development is the possibility of a wireless-based technology where a cluster can be established. There is £1·5 million available for that from the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Industry in London. Mr Paisley Jnr is correct; it is a key issue, but it is being addressed. The facilities and the understanding are there. The key driver is not the supply of wireless-based technology, but the demand for it. It may cost British Telecom between £100,000 and £200,000 to convert an exchange such as ADSL only to find that it has just half a dozen customers. That is of no use to British Telecom, so demand for an exchange must be stimulated, and anything that the Member can do in that regard would be appreciated.

Mr Francie Molloy: Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. I thank the Minister for his statement and for his detailed answers. What progress has been made on the creation of the all-Ireland trade directory in which InterTradeIreland is involved? The Minister said that the North/South Ministerial Council received a verbal report from the chief executive of InterTradeIreland, but surely in ‘Digital Island’ a report of a different type could have been made available through modern technology.

Sir Reg Empey: The all-Ireland trade directory is not covered in this report. Work on the directory is ongoing, and I will write to Mr Molloy with details.
Inevitably, the Council will receive verbal reports, because the meetings take place up to several weeks after the relevant paperwork goes out. Also, there are other matters on which the Council must be updated, and it will want to question the chief executive of InterTradeIreland when he is there. Not everything can be done in writing, but I accept Mr Molloy’s point. However, I think that there will always be a verbal report, and it is appropriate that the chief executive, to be accountable, be available for the Council to question face to face.

North/South Ministerial Council: Food Safety and Health

Mr Jim Wilson: I have received notice from the Minister of Health, Social Services and Public Safety that she wishes to make a statement.

Ms Bairbre de Brún: Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. Is mian liom tuairisc a thabhairt don Tionól ar chruinniú den Chomhairle Aireachta Thuaidh/Theas a tionóladh i bhformáid earnáileach in Ard Mhacha Dé hAoine 28 Meitheamh 2002. Ag an chruinniú seo breithníodh ábhair a bhaineann leis an Bhord um Chur Chun Cinn Sábháilteachta Bia agus le comhoibriú ar shaincheisteanna sláinte.
Arna ainmniú ag an Chéad-Aire agus ag an LeasChéad-Aire, d’fhreastail an tUasal James Leslie, Aire in Oifig an Chéad-Aire agus an LeasChéad-Aire, agus mé féin ar an chúigiú cruinniú den Chomhairle san earnáil sábháilteachta bia agus in earnáil na sláinte. Ba é an tUasal Micheál Martin, an tAire a bhfuil cúram na Roinne Sláinte agus Leanaí air, a rinne ionadaíocht thar ceann Rialtas na hÉireann.
Tá an ráiteas seo, a cheadaigh an tUasal James Leslie, á thabhairt ar a shon chomh maith.
Fuair an Chomhairle tuairisc ar an dul chun cinn a rinneadh ar riarachán agus ar obair an Bhoird um Chur Chun Cinn Sábháilteachta Bia. Bhí cur síos sa tuairisc ar an dul chun cinn a rinneadh ar chomhoibriú eolaíoch agus ar chomhnaisc shaotharlainne agus ar mhalartuithe foirne; an fhorbairt atá á déanamh ar fhóram bia agus cothaithe uile-oileáin; an cur chun cinn atá a dhéanamh ar fhaireachán trasteorann ar ghalair bhia-iompraithe; agus feachtas ilmheáin arb aidhm dó a chinntiú go ngéillimid do reachtaíocht sláinteachtais.
D’fháiltigh an Chomhairle roimh an dul chun cinn a rinne an Bord um Chur Chun Cinn Sábháilteachta Bia agus é ag cur a chláir oibre i gcrích.
Rinne an Chomhairle straitéis chorporáideach 2002-04 an bhoird a bhreithniú agus a cheadú. Déanfar athbhreithniú ar an phlean gach bliain sa phleanáil bhliantúil gnó nuair is féidir spriocanna a uasdhátú más gá. Cuirfear an plean bliantúil faoi bhráid na Comhairle Aireachta Thuaidh/ Theas gach bliain.
Cheadaigh an Chomhairle dréachtplean ag aimsiú riachtanas sóisialta nua an bhoird, a leasaíodh i ndiaidh comhairliúcháin phoiblí, agus scéim chomhionannais leasaithe an bhoird atá le cur faoi bhráid an Choimisiúin um Chomhionannas lena cheadú.
Fuair an Chomhairle cur i láthair ar ghníomhaíochtaí an tionscnaimh comhoibriú agus ag obair i gcomhar. Maidir le saincheisteanna na hearnála sláinte, fuair an Chomhairle tuairisc ar an dul chun cinn a rinneadh ar an chlár oibre a comhaontaíodh ag cruinnithe cheana. Ar na tosaíochtaí a aimsíodh le haghaidh comhoibriú tá seirbhísí taismí agus éigeandálaí, pleanáil le haghaidh olléigeandálaí, comhoibriú ar threalamh ardteicneolaíochta, taighde ar ailse, agus cur chun cinn sláinte.
Chuala an Chomhairle faoin dul chun cinn atáthar a dhéanamh maidir le comhoibriú trasteorann i seirbhísí otharlainne atá faoi cheannas an Ghrúpa Thuaidh/Theas um Seirbhísí Otharlann Réigiúnach. Sa tuairisc seo bhí cur síos ar chúrsaí maidir le nódú orgán sa Deisceart agus conas a b’fhéidir na seirbhísí seo a leathnú ar bhonn uile-oileáin.
Thacaigh an Chomhairle leis an dul chun cinn a rinne meithleacha oibre ar phleanáil le haghaidh éigeandála. Cuireadh an Chomhairle ar an eolas faoi phleananna maidir le comhoibriú agus ag obair i gcomhar ról bainistíochta a ghlacadh chuige féin ag forbairt pleanála le haghaidh éigeandála agus cúram réamh-ospidéil.
Cuireadh in iúl don Chomhairle gur ceapadh sainchomhairleoirí le staidéar féidearthachta a thionscnamh ar na costais agus na sochair a bhaineann le seirbhís míochaine éigeandála ingearáin a chur ar fáil. Fuair an Chomhairle tuairiscí ar an dul chun cinn a rinneadh ar chomhoiliúint seirbhísí dóiteáin thuaidh/theas ar thaismí tráchta bóthair.
Thug an Chomhairle dá haire go bhfuil obair á déanamh i gcónaí in ábhair ina bhféadfaí comhoibriú trasteorann a thionscnamh, lena n-áirítear taighde breise agus anailís le meas cad é mar a rachadh teicneolaíocht tomagrafaíochta astaithe positron ar bhonn uile-oileáin chun sochair don tsláinte.
Hinseadh don Chomhairle go bhfuiltear ag déanamh taighde le fáil amach arbh fhéidir comhoibriú a dhéanamh ar bhonn uile-oileáin ar sholáthar seirbhísí agus ar oiliúint oibríochtúil i seirbhísí taca riachtanacha san earnáil géarmhíochaine.
Thug an Chomhairle dá haire go bhfuil comhoibriú ar siúl sa Chuibhreannas Ailse ar Thaighde Ailse. Thug an Chomhairle dá haire gur fógraíodh maoiniú suntasach breise le haghaidh taighde teiripe ailse agus forbairtí i gcomhordú trialacha cliniciúla ar bhonn uile-oileáin.
Thug an Chomhairle dá haire an dul chun cinn a rinneadh go dtí seo i dtionscnamh chur chun cinn sláinte, lena n-áirítear na torthaí spreagúla ón mheasúnú a rinneadh ar an fheachtas aigéid fhólaigh.
D’aontaigh an Chomhairle gur sa Deisceart i nDeireadh Fómhair 2002 a bheadh an chéad chruinniú eile sna hearnálacha seo.
D’aontaigh an Chomhairle ar théacs na teachtaireachta a eisíodh i ndiaidh an chruinnithe. Cuireadh cóip den teachtaireacht sa Leabharlann.
I wish to report to the Assembly on the meeting of the North/South Ministerial Council held in sectoral format in Armagh on Friday 28 June 2002. The meeting considered matters relating to the Food Safety Promotion Board and co-operation on health issues.
Following nomination by the First and Deputy First Ministers, Mr James Leslie, junior Minister in the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister, and I attended the fifth meeting of the Council in its Food Safety and Health sectoral format. Mr Micheál Martin, the Minister with responsibility for the Department of Health and Children, represented the Irish Government. This statement has been approved by Mr Leslie and is also made on his behalf.
The Council received a progress report on the administration and work of the Food Safety Promotion Board, which included details of progress on scientific co-operation; laboratory link and staff exchanges; the development of an all-island food and nutrition forum; the promotion of cross-border surveillance of food-borne diseases; and a multi-media campaign aimed at improving compliance with hygiene legislation.
The Council welcomed the progress made by the Food Safety Promotion Board on advancing its programme of work. The Council considered and approved the board’s corporate strategy for 2002-04. The plan will be reassessed annually in the context of the annual business planning process, during which targets can be updated as necessary, and it will be submitted to the North/South Ministerial Council annually. The Council approved the board’s draft New TSN plan, which was amended after public consultation, and the board’s amended equality scheme for submission to the Equality Commission.
The Council received a presentation on the current activities of the co-operation and working together initiative (CAWT).
The Council received progress reports on the programme of work on health sectoral matters that it had agreed at previous meetings. The priorities identified for co-operation include accident and emergency services; planning for major emergencies; co-operation on high-technology equipment; cancer research and health promotion.
The Council heard progress reports on the continuing cross-border co-operation in hospital services overseen by the North/South Regional Hospital Services Group (NSRHSG), which included the current position on organ transplantation in the South and the possibility of developing the services on an all-island basis.
The Council endorsed the progress made by emergency planning working groups. It was informed of plans for CAWT to undertake a project management role in developing emergency planning and pre-hospital care initiatives. The Council was also advised of the appointment of consultants to undertake a feasibility study on the costs and benefits associated with the introduction of an all-island helicopter emergency medical service. It also received progress reports on joint North/South fire-service training for road-traffic accidents.
In addition, the Council noted that work is continuing in several areas that have potential for cross-border co-operation, including further research and analysis to gauge the potential health gain from positron emission tomography (PET) technology on an all-island basis. The Council was also informed that the potential for all-island co-operation on procurement and operational training in essential support services in the acute sector is being researched.
The Council acknowledged the continuing co-operation on cancer research within the cancer consortium. It also noted the announcement of further significant funding for cancer therapy research and the developments to date in the co-ordination of all-island clinical trials.
The Council recognised progress on several health promotion initiatives, including the encouraging results from the evaluation of the folic acid campaign.
The Council agreed that its next meeting in these sectoral formats would take place in the South in October 2002. It approved the text of the communiqué that was issued after the meeting, a copy of which has been placed in the Library.

Dr Joe Hendron: I welcome the Minister’s report. I am aware of the good work that the Food Safety Promotion Board does across the island of Ireland. The board spoke to the Committee in May about its current programme.
First, as child-protection issues are dear to all our hearts, I would appreciate it if the Minister could expand on the co-ordination of child-protection issues on the island of Ireland, North and South.
Secondly, I welcome the development of emergency planning and the exploration of initiatives such as the helicopter emergency medical service. However, can the Minister comment on the feasibility study that is examining the introduction of an all-Ireland service and on the fact that the Royal Group of Hospitals, which provides key regional services, does not have its own helipad?
My final point is about positron emission tomography (PET), an issue that the Minister has led over the past couple of years. As Members will know, PET technology goes far beyond MRI scanning. Although it is available at Blackrock in Dublin, and now at the Royal Hospital for the people of Northern Ireland, can the Minister comment on the work that has been carried out with regard to that technology on an all-Ireland basis?

Ms Bairbre de Brún: I welcome the fact that as a result of a significant charitable donation we now have an initial PET scanner at the Royal Group of Hospitals in Belfast. A framework for evaluating the benefits of that new technology will be in place once the facility begins proper operation.
With regard to the North/South Ministerial Council, so far the joint co-operation work has focused on building a framework for the shared learning of the clinical benefits of PET. The development of a PET clinical scanning service would be an appropriate area for North/South co-operation.
The work on child-protection issues is progressing. The lead on that is within the education sector, but I have clearly taken an interest in that too. My officials are members of the working group, and I am delighted with the progress it has made. With regard to the work that I undertook, individuals applying for paid and unpaid work with children are checked through the Pre-Employment Consultancy Service (PECS), which is operated by the Department. As well as checks carried out against criminal records, checks are also carried out against the PECS register. Similar lists held by the Department of Education here, the Department for Education and Skills and the Department of Health in England and Wales are also checked. The criminal records of individuals moving here from England, Scotland, Wales or the South are also examined, including information on convictions, cautions and bind overs.
As reported, work is ongoing with regard to the helicopter emergency medical service. The consultants have not come back yet with any detail on the options for the locations of such a service and, therefore, have not commented on the specifics of what is available in each hospital.

Mrs Iris Robinson: Can the Minister confirm that we will be the driving force in any new helicopter emergency medical service and that it will be based in Northern Ireland? Has there been any discussion with her counterparts in the west of Scotland, who would also benefit from the service owing to the close proximity of Scotland’s coast?

Ms Bairbre de Brún: Before looking at the matter on an all-Ireland basis, we investigated journey times from Scotland, and the fastest times were still well outside what is needed here. I mentioned the options for the locations of such a service in terms of the all-Ireland study, which has now been commissioned, because we are not necessarily looking at one single location for such a service, and the group’s terms of reference allow it to look at several options.

Ms Sue Ramsey: Can the Minister detail the progress that has been made on health promotion initiatives? I congratulate the North/South Ministerial Council on the successful folic acid campaign. Can the Minister copy the encouraging results of that campaign to Members?

Ms Bairbre de Brún: I welcome recognition of the success of the folic acid campaign. The North/South Ministerial Council welcomed the televised public information campaigns on folic acid and on physical activity. The Council was also informed about collaboration on smoking issues, about discussions on the introduction of an all-Ireland Healthy Eating Circle awards scheme and on the feasibility of the development of an all-Ireland food and nutrition strategy. An all-Ireland conference on physical activity has been arranged for 27 and 28 November 2002 in the Canal Court Hotel in Newry. The results of lifestyle surveys that compare information on general health and lifestyle throughout the islands will be published towards the end of the year. I have previously reported to the Assembly that consideration was being given to the appointment of dedicated programme managers. A programme manager will soon be appointed by the Health Promotion Agency to help to develop and co-ordinate a strategically planned joint health-promotion programme.

Prof Monica McWilliams: The Minister referred to an all-Ireland physical activity conference — rather than an all-Ireland physical activity and exercise evaluation — which MLAs might be asked to attend.
I have given some thought to a recent case in south Belfast that has some bearing on improving compliance with hygiene legislation. The current legislation is weak, so it would not be much to ask that compliance with that legislation be encouraged. The case involved a bakery that supplied food to local hospitals. It had broken nine food hygiene orders and was prosecuted. The magistrate allowed the case to be adjourned on three occasions, so perhaps consideration should be given to training the judiciary. The bakery continued to do business even though nine prosecution orders had been served. The maximum fine for breaking legislation is only £500, which is minimal for a business that can cause illness. That issue must be dealt with if there is to be compliance.
What is the maximum fine in the Republic of Ireland? Are fines much higher there than in Northern Ireland? If fines were higher, it would make more sense to ask for compliance. Businesses pay little attention to hygiene orders because the fines are not high enough.
I am heartened that research into cancer therapy is being undertaken —

Mr Jim Wilson: Order. The Member is taking a long time to get to the question. I believe that you are about to preface a question.

Prof Monica McWilliams: I assure you, Mr Deputy Speaker, that the question is short. I welcome all-Ireland clinical trial activity, because it lends itself well to cancer research. Will the significant funding for cancer therapy research come from the block grant? What is the level of that funding?

Ms Bairbre de Brún: I am unsure about the precise range of activities in the field of cancer research on which the Member seeks information.
Following a review, funding of 1·9 million euros for clinical trials was announced in November 2002. Six awards were made, including two planning grants. Additional funding of 0·7 million euros was made available by the Department of Health and Children to support the next phase of the initiative in 2002, the call for proposals. A second call to hospitals was issued in February 2002.
The objective for the appropriate model for the development of clinical trials infrastructure in Ireland is to fund several centres to carry out high-quality clinical research trials to a level similar to that already achieved in Belfast City Hospital and to fund an all-Ireland clinical trials group to co-ordinate the trial activity of funded hospitals.
Regulation and compliance with hygiene legislation is a matter for the Food Standards Agency. I will raise that matter with the agency.

Mr Alan McFarland: The Minister will be aware of concern about cross-border hospitals. In her progress report on continuing co-operation, was there any more enlightenment on where the cross-border development plan for the Cavan, Sligo and Erne hospitals, which has left Tyrone completely bereft of any hospital support, is going? Was that discussed at the meeting?
Dr Hayes’s study contained a substantial body of information, especially from America, concerning helicopter transport in medical situations. I understand that helicopter transport has been extensively tested in America. The advice given to Dr Hayes was that light aircraft use was fine, but that helicopters were extremely dangerous in medical cases because of their unreliability in the air. Was that discussed at the meeting? Will she speak to Dr Hayes?

Ms Bairbre de Brún: The study that has been commissioned is on the feasibility, as well as the costs, of a helicopter emergency medical service. Members will be aware that successive North/South Ministerial Council meetings have discussed that issue and that the Ministers who have attended those meetings have endorsed it. There is, of course, cross-party representation from the Assembly at those meetings. We have decided to commission the feasibility study, including options for the locations of such a service. The study will consider all matters impinging on the feasibility of such a service.
On the question of developing better services, I do not agree with the Member’s wording of his question, as frequently happens. I come to it with a slightly different outlook. However, I informed the North/South Ministerial Council health sector meeting that I had, in the plenary session of the Council that morning, referred to my announcement on 12 June of proposals for modernising hospital services and restructuring health and social services and that the strategy was tabled for discussion at the last meeting of the North/South regional hospital service group.
The Member will be aware that the permanent secretary of my Department and the secretary general of the Department of Health and Children have had specific discussions on the potential use of hospitals in the South by people from the Fermanagh and Tyrone areas. Minister Martin and I have also spoken about my proposals for modernising services and have agreed to meet for further discussion on those matters. It is important to note the report that was made at that meeting. As regards the ongoing work, a further meeting with Minister Martin is planned, as I have said.
The North/South Regional Hospital Services Group, which was established to consider the opportunities for developing partnerships, covers the wider regional and supraregional services, as that work is more localised. Minister Martin and I have agreed that the resources required for an examination of the specific use of hospitals in that area can best be taken forward by officials. A small team of my officials will visit hospitals in Monaghan, Cavan, Sligo and Letterkenny to discuss with clinicians and officers of the North Eastern and North Western Health Boards services that those hospitals might provide for people in Fermanagh and Tyrone. I expect the first stage of the work to be completed by the end of September.

Mr Francie Molloy: Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. I thank the Minister for her statement and the details about the conference. Does the Council recognise the considerable achievements of co-operation and working together (CAWT) with the GP out-of-hours services and its overall work on cross-border initiatives? In terms of the interlinking of hospital services, it is important that the review takes into account not just Cavan and Monaghan, but other counties in Ireland. Under the new proposals, which county in Ireland, other than Tyrone, will not have babies born in it? Will the Minister consider those matters?

Ms Bairbre de Brún: Given the range of different maternity services that are being proposed, I do not know if it is possible to say that, in future, there will be any counties in which no babies are born. Notwithstanding that, my overall responsibility is to ensure that the best possible services are delivered to the population of a given area. Thus, my proposals offer the best possible configuration of services for the people of Fermanagh and Tyrone and for the entire population.
The Council received a report from CAWT and welcomes its work. A feasibility study commissioned by CAWT on the GP out-of-hours services has been undertaken by the University of Ulster and the National University of Ireland, Galway. The study found that approximately 70,000 people, North and South, are closer to out-of-hours services across the border. Furthermore, up to 70% of that population live in areas that can be classed as socially deprived. A number of detailed legislative, financial and practical issues have been addressed in the feasibility study, and the CAWT management board is considering a proposal to provide further support under INTERREG III for two pilot projects to test the concept of establishing cross-border arrangements to allow people easier access to GP out-of-hours services wherever they live.

Mr George Savage: I also welcome the Minister’s statement. One of the issues that concerns me is organ transplantation. Will those services be expanded in Northern Ireland?

Ms Bairbre de Brún: We are examining that area closely. Not only does working together in this way make sense, it also allows us to do things that would otherwise not be possible. I have great hopes for that area.

Family Law (Divorce etc) Bill: First Stage

Dr Sean Farren: I beg leave to lay before the Assembly a Bill [NIA 1/02] to make provision for certain general principles in the exercise of functions under the Matrimonial Causes (Northern Ireland) Order 1978; to amend Article 3 of that Order and Article 3 of the Domestic Proceedings (Northern Ireland) Order 1980; to provide for mediation in proceedings under those Orders; and to make provision for the equal treatment of husband and wife in certain cases.
Bill passed First Stage and ordered to be printed.

Mr Jim Wilson: The Bill will be put on the list of pending business until a date for its Second Stage has been determined.

Areas of Special Scientific Interest Bill: First Stage

Mr Dermot Nesbitt: I beg leave to lay before the Assembly a Bill [NIA 2/02] to make new provision with respect to areas of special scientific interest.
Bill passed First Stage and ordered to be printed.

Mr Jim Wilson: The Bill will be put on the list of pending business until a date for its Second Stage has been determined.

Social Security Bill: First Stage

Mr Nigel Dodds: I beg leave to lay before the Assembly a Bill [NIA 3/02] to amend the law relating to statutory maternity pay; to amend the law relating to maternity allowance; to make provision for work-focused interviews for partners of benefit claimants; to make provision about the use of information for, or relating to, employment and training; to amend the Deregulation and Contracting Out (Northern Ireland) Order 1996; and for connected purposes.
Bill passed First Stage and ordered to be printed.

Mr Jim Wilson: The Bill will be put on the list of pending business until a date for its Second Stage has been determined.

Health and Personal Social Services Bill: Final Stage

Ms Bairbre de Brún: Molaim go ritear an Bille Sláinte agus Seirbhísí Sóisialta agus Pearsanta anois.
I beg to move
That the Health and Personal Social Services Bill (NIA 6/01) do now pass.

Dr Joe Hendron: Question put and agreed to.
Resolved:
That the Health and Personal Social Services Bill (NIA 6/01) do now pass.

Social Security Bill: Accelerated Passage

Mr Nigel Dodds: I beg to move
That, in accordance with Standing Order 40(4), this Assembly grants accelerated passage to the Social Security Bill (NIA 3/02).
The Bill is an important piece of legislation, as it makes provisions for Northern Ireland that correspond to the social security provisions that are contained in the Employment Act 2002. The Bill also amends article 17 of the Deregulation and Contracting Out (Northern Ireland) Order 1996 to ensure proper control by the Assembly of Orders that are made under that article.
There is a long-standing principle of parity between Great Britain and Northern Ireland in the fields of social security, pensions and child support. Given that people in Northern Ireland pay the same rate of income tax and National Insurance contributions as those in Great Britain, they are entitled to expect changes in the legislation in Great Britain to apply in Northern Ireland with minimal delay.
The Employment Act 2002 received Royal Assent on 8 July, and the Department for Work and Pensions is introducing several of its substantive provisions, especially those relating to the use of information and to maternity pay, as a matter of urgency.
In addition, clause 7 of the Bill seeks to amend article 17 of the Deregulation and Contracting Out (Northern Ireland) Order 1996 to allow for Assembly control of a proposed carers Order to deal with the deregulation of carers’ allowance.
The carers Order will allow carers aged 65 and over to claim invalid care allowance for the first time; it will extend entitlement to invalid care allowance for up to eight weeks after the death of a disabled person; and, to make it clearer that the benefit is for carers and their needs, it will change the name of the benefit to "carers’ allowance" from April 2003.
The removal of the upper age limit for claims to invalid care allowance means that carers aged 65 and over without a retirement pension, or with a reduced rate of retirement pension, will be able to receive the benefit, thus increasing their income by up to £42·45 per week. It will also give carers who receive the minimum income guarantee access to the carer premium, which is £24·80 per week.
The provision for carers aged 65 and over to claim for the first time and the extension of entitlement for up to eight weeks after the death of a disabled person are scheduled to come into operation across the country on 28 October 2002. It is, therefore, vital that the Bill be granted accelerated passage so that carers aged 65 and over can enjoy the benefits of invalid care allowance from the same date as their counterparts elsewhere in the country. To do otherwise would be to disadvantage our carers aged 65 and over.
Although the statutory maternity pay changes are not due to come into operation until 6 April 2003, the changes to the period of notice to be given to an employer and the safeguarding of statutory maternity pay from the fifteenth week before the expected week of confinement will apply to women with an expected date of confinement of 6 April or later. For that reason, clause 3 of the Bill must be introduced early to allow regulations coming into operation in November 2002 to be made.
I am, therefore, asking that the Bill proceed under the accelerated passage procedure outlined in Standing Order 40(4) so that we can bring Northern Ireland law on such matters into line with that in Great Britain with the minimum of delay. The use of the accelerated passage procedure means that there will not be a formal Committee Stage. However, I met the Committee for Social Development recently to discuss the provisions of the Bill, including the reasons for seeking accelerated passage. There will be opportunities for Members to make their views known during the Second Stage, Consideration Stage and Further Consideration Stage.

Mr Fred Cobain: The Minister notified the Committee of his intention to seek accelerated passage at the beginning of August, and he agreed to attend a specially convened meeting on 29 August to explain the reasons behind that request. At that meeting, the Minister said that the Bill is a parity measure because it replicates social security provisions contained in the Employment Act 2002 — legislation that has been enacted in Westminster. The Minister also said that he felt it necessary to make minor amendments to the Deregulation and Contracting Out (Northern Ireland) Order 1996.
We listened carefully to what the Minister said. The Committee welcomed the Minister’s assurances that the provisions in this Bill are beneficial. We are satisfied that that is the case. The Committee also accepted the Minister’s contention that it is important to ensure that people in Northern Ireland benefit from these changes at the same time as they are introduced in Great Britain.
In the light of the Minister’s assurances, the Committee agreed not to object to his request that the Bill be granted accelerated passage.

Mr Eamonn ONeill: As the Chairperson and the Minister have said, the legislation is important. The Committee supports the use of accelerated passage because, on examining the Bill, it is clear that recipients would be disadvantaged by delay.
However, as you are aware, Mr Deputy Speaker, there is always concern about the use of accelerated passage. At the Committee meeting that the Chairperson has just mentioned, I suggested to the Minister that he bring early notification of any changes to Statutory Rules to the Committee for scrutiny, and the Minister was agreeable to that idea. Clearly, his Department will be in touch with its counterpart in Westminster about the legislative process. If some early correspondence could be given to us — not necessarily for this Bill, but for other procedures —the Committee could have an opportunity to scrutinise Bills at an earlier stage.

Prof Monica McWilliams: I too was concerned when I heard that accelerated passage was being proposed for this Bill, but having heard the Minister I understand the reason for it, which is that no one should lose out as a result of late payments.
I am heartened by Mr ONeill’s comments that the Committee will be able to scrutinise Statutory Rules as they proceed. I am not a member of the Committee for Social Development, but I made it my business to ask a member about the range of benefits that the Bill covers. The Minister mentioned the carers’ allowance. We took that legislation through the Committee for Health, Social Services and Public Safety.
I heard the Minister say that this will be a devolved matter, and, therefore, I assume that the Minister will produce the rules and regulations himself. Simply put, will parity have the same effect as it does for many other benefits? In other words, will they be paid at the same rates, or will there be discretion in Northern Ireland for variation in the carers’ allowance?

Mr Nigel Dodds: I am grateful to the Chairperson of the Committee and to Mr ONeill for their remarks. I was grateful for the opportunity to explain to the Committee why the Department was seeking accelerated passage for this Bill. I would prefer to avoid that process where possible, but we must treat each of these parity measures on their merits, and we will have to return to the issue. The underlying principle must be that because people in Northern Ireland pay the same rates of tax, National Insurance and pension contributions as their counterparts elsewhere in the country, they are entitled to the same rates of benefits at the same time and on the same conditions.
Therefore, I am grateful that there will be no objection to accelerated passage in this case, but at the Second Stage and further stages there will be an opportunity to go into more detail on the substance of the Bill.
In answer to Ms McWilliams, clause 7 has been inserted in the Bill to give the Assembly control over the carers’ Order. Social security is ultimately a devolved matter, although under the terms of the Northern Ireland Act 1998, there is for the first time a statutory provision that requires the Minister for Social Development and the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions to agree to implement a single system of social security and to implement parity.
The Northern Ireland Assembly can alter the rates of various benefits. However, whether those benefits are demand-led or paid directly by Treasury, the necessary extra money would have to be found from the Northern Ireland block. In Northern Ireland, the complex social security systems are so intimately tied in with the system throughout the rest of the UK that we would have to fund the costs of separating the computer systems in order to deliver that sort of benefit change. The cost would be severe, and the underlying principle of parity between Northern Ireland and the rest of the UK, which has been to our advantage over the years, would be breached.
I ask Members to support the granting of accelerated passage to the Social Security Bill.

Mr Jim Wilson: I remind Members that the motion requires cross-community support.
Question put and agreed to.
Resolved (with cross-community support):
That, in accordance with Standing Order 40(4), this Assembly grants accelerated passage to the Social Security Bill (NIA 3/02).

Mr Jim Wilson: The Bill will receive its Second Stage on 10 September 2002.

Speaker’s Business

Mr Jim Wilson: In the course of the debate on the Final Stage of the Health and Personal Social Services Bill, I neglected to call Mr McCarthy to speak: I did not spot his name on the list of Members wishing to speak. I apologise to the House and to MrMcCarthy for that omission.

Mr Kieran McCarthy: I accept your apology, Mr Deputy Speaker. I was disappointed that I did not get the opportunity to speak. As Members will recall, I introduced a number of important amendments to the Bill in June relating to free personal care.

Strategic Planning Bill: Committee Stage (Period Extension)

Mr Alban Maginness: I beg to move
That, in accordance with Standing Order 31(5), the period referred to in Standing Order 31(3) be extended to 25November 2002, in relation to the Committee Stage of the Strategic Planning Bill (NIA 17/01).
The Strategic Planning Bill received its Second Stage on 25 June and was referred to the Committee for Regional Development on 26 June. Although the Bill is primarily technical in nature, it is, nevertheless, an important piece of legislation.
The Committee is, therefore, anxious to ensure that it carries out its responsibilities and conducts a rigorous scrutiny of the Bill. To that end, the Committee wishes to call several witnesses, and it is important that sufficient time be allocated to allow the Committee to consider the evidence. Other Committee work pressures are building up, which will add to difficulties in considering the Bill within the limit of the prescribed 30 days. Therefore, on behalf of the Committee, I seek an extension to 25 November 2002 to allow sufficient time for the Committee to consider the Bill and report its findings. I ask Members for their support.
Question put and agreed to.
Resolved:
That, in accordance with Standing Order 31(5), the period referred to in Standing Order 31(3) be extended to 25 November 2002, in relation to the Committee Stage of the Strategic Planning Bill (NIA 17/01).

Ad Hoc Committee on Draft Firearms (Northern Ireland) Order 2002

Resolved:
That, pursuant to Standing Order 48(7), this Assembly appoints an Ad Hoc Committee to consider –
The proposal for a draft Firearms (Northern Ireland) Order 2002 referred by the Secretary of State and to submit a report to the Assembly by 17 December 2002.
Composition: UUP 2
SDLP 2
DUP 2
SF 2
Other parties 3
Quorum: The quorum shall be five.
Procedure: The procedures of the Committee shall be such as the Committee shall determine. — [Ms McWilliams.]
The sitting was suspended at 1.30 pm.
On resuming (Mr Speaker in the Chair) —

First minister and Deputy First Minister

I wish to inform Members that question 10 in the name of Mrs Courtney has been withdrawn and will receive a written answer.

World Summit

1. asked the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister to make a statement on the Executive response to the World Summit on Sustainable Development.
(AQO31/02)


12. asked the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister to give details of the First Minister’s recent visit to South Africa; and to make a statement.
(AQO17/02)


I went to South Africa to represent Northern Ireland as part of the United Kingdom delegation at the World Summit on Sustainable Development. The Deputy First Minister had intended to attend also but, sadly, was unable to do so because of his mother’s terminal illness. I am sure that the Assembly will join me in extending to him sincere sympathies on her death.
The summit drew up an important international programme for sustainable development. It agreed on actions for, among other things, sanitation; water supplies; the conservation of fish stocks and other natural resources; and the further development of renewable energy. The Executive had begun to tackle those and related issues before the summit. As Members know, sustainable development is a key cross-cutting theme that underpins the work and priorities set out in the Programme for Government. In the coming months, the Executive will consider the summit’s implications for us. We shall combine those findings with the outcome of our consultations on the Northern Ireland sustainable development strategy. The Executive have also recently published the Northern Ireland biodiversity strategy.
While I was at the summit, I took the opportunity to develop a sustainable homes project at a township called Ivory Park, near Johannesburg. I also looked at three community development projects near Cape Town. I met the Premier of the Western Cape Province and several of his ministerial colleagues to discuss those and related matters. I also met the Canadian Prime Minister, the Israeli Foreign Minister, the Vice-President of Colombia and a senior representative of the Movement for Democratic Change in Zimbabwe. I also met Cyril Ramaphosa, members of the South African Human Rights Commission and several other interesting personalities.


On behalf of my party, I offer my sympathy to the Deputy First Minister Mark Durkan on the sad loss of his mother last week.
I hope that the First Minister’s trip to South Africa was inspirational and that, after meeting so many important people, he has brought home fresh ideas. Does he intend to introduce a statutory duty for sustainable development along the lines of that introduced for the National Assembly for Wales in the Government of Wales Act 1998? If not, what plans does he have? Does he envisage committing this Assembly to the principles of sustainable development by putting it at the heart of our decisions, programmes, policies and ways of working?


I am sorry to say that I am not familiar with the Welsh legislation, but we shall consider it and the Member’s proposal.
We shall also consider the implications of the UN summit. We face challenges in several areas, particularly with regard to renewable energy. The agreements reached in Johannesburg on water and related matters are very important for the Third World. They put in place standards that do not exceed those that apply to us under European Directives. As the Member knows, we have much work to do to ensure that the water supply and water services in Northern Ireland meet the standards set by the European Directives, which are higher than the UN-sponsored standards set in Johannesburg. We shall consider the ongoing strategies and responses to consultation papers to establish whether we should take more general action in response to need.


Can the First Minister comment on development being the main means by which poverty will be tackled in developing countries?


I was particularly struck by the position in some of the townships around Johannesburg and Cape Town. Of course, while one wants development to be sustainable, the key need in the Third World is for actual development. To achieve effective development, there must be a clear opportunity for people to participate in the economy and, indeed, a stable legal order for that to happen. We are conscious of huge opportunities in development. Although we have no direct responsibility for that and it is not something that we can directly assist, Members will want to see the ideas from the UN summit being carried forward.


Bearing in mind that the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister has no direct responsibility in such matters, was this the best use of your Department’s resources — especially when there is such public concern about the number of people it takes to run your Department and the cost involved?


The Member misses the point. We were invited to join the UK delegation, along with representatives from the devolved Administrations in Wales and Scotland, simply because whatever came out of the Johannesburg summit would have to be implemented by those responsible for economic and environmental matters. In so far as that would affect England, the UK Government would be responsible: for Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland the devolved Administrations would be responsible.
The UK Government took the view that it was important to include the devolved Administrations as a way of demonstrating their commitment to implement whatever comes from the summit. Regarding economic and environmental matters, being at the summit gave us the opportunity to indicate our commitment to see that standards set out in the UN summit, and, indeed, European Directives, are achieved. That is important, and attending the summit was very valuable for this Administration.

Countering Sectarianism

2. asked the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister to make a statement on action being taken by the Executive to counter sectarianism.
(AQO30/02)

Interface Violence

8. asked the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister to make a statement on the recent interface violence within Northern Ireland.
(AQO13/02)


With permission, I will take questions 2 and 8 together. We deplore interface violence and all manifestations of sectarianism. Such antisocial behaviour is harmful not only to the well-being of local communities but to Northern Ireland as a whole. It destroys the local environment; ruins businesses and employment prospects; drives away new investment; and presents an unattractive picture to the world. We must all support the police in any good efforts to maintain law and order as well as stepping up our own efforts to deal with the underlying causes of sectarianism.
The Executive have committed themselves, in the Programme for Government, to putting a cross-departmental strategy and framework in place for promoting community relations and to ensure that there is an effective and co-ordinated approach to sectarian intimidation. A consultation paper is at an advanced stage of drafting, and it is anticipated that it will be submitted to the Executive for consideration in the near future. Following Executive approval, the consultation paper will be published. Respondents will have two months to communicate their views.
We intend to ensure that consultation is as broad as possible. For that reason we intend to convene meetings of political parties and social partners, including the churches and community organisations. The specific actions that should be taken to improve community relations will be discussed at those meetings.
The Executive stand ready to support any local initiative aimed at assisting local communities to resolve their differences peacefully. Our office has provided support through the Community Relations Council for a considerable number of groups and projects aimed at improving community relations.


I thank the Minister for his reply: unfortunately, coming when it does, it is not terribly credible. On 11 December 2001 I was told that a consultative document on community relations would be issued to interested bodies in April 2002. In April I was told it was imminent. I have just been told, yet again, that it is imminent. When are they actually going to do something about producing this document as opposed to talking about it?
In the meantime, the Executive have collectively failed to take any action on illegal flags and graffiti, action that was supported unanimously in the Assembly. The excuse for doing nothing about those issues was that they were being dealt with as part of the community relations review, which has run completely into the sand. Since then, we have all the difficulties that arose during the summer, followed by Ministers making separate personal visits to either side of the peace line.


I must ask the Member to come to the question.


When are they going to do something collectively?


As I indicated in my answer, we hope that the draft consultation paper will go to the Executive shortly. It will then be issued for consultation. However, we do not want to rely on merely going through the standard consultation mechanisms, given the seriousness of the issue. Thus, the First Minister and I have decided that we will convene meetings of the political parties and of the social partners to discuss all the implications. We are trying to focus on this in ways that are helpful and that will involve as many people of different perspectives as possible. The issue will not simply be in any one Department’s control, and it will certainly not be controlled by the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister.
We have responded in different ways to problems in several areas. We have worked with other Departments to try to ensure that the devolved Administration is able to respond constructively where it can to some of the issues and difficulties that arise. That work is ongoing.
Mr Ford made an inference about people making separate visits to different sides of the peace line. I had planned to be in east Belfast last Wednesday, on both sides of the peace line, but my mother’s death meant that those plans had to change.


Does the Deputy First Minister agree with the statement by the Assistant Chief Constable for Belfast, Alan McQuillan, linking mainstream paramilitaries with the orchestration of interface violence? Can he confirm the current status of the road realignment project promised to the people of Glenbryn?


The Assistant Chief Constable gave an assessment of the involvement of paramilitary organisations in the violence. We all have reason to believe that different paramilitary organisations have been active in different ways and at different levels in much of the violence that we have seen. I am in no doubt that, in many instances, Loyalist paramilitaries are the sole aggressor; in other instances, they are the primary aggressor. In other instances and areas there are Loyalist and Republicans involved actively in fermenting and continuing the violence. We want all paramilitaries to desist from orchestrating violence or responding in a violent way.
The Member asked about what he referred to as the road realignment project. Members may be aware that the First Minister and I appointed arbitrators to look at how best to deal with the outstanding issues in relation to community safety matters and community dialogue. Those were the two main issues that we still had to address and make progress on, based on the letter that the First Minister and I issued last November.
There was not sufficient consensus or acceptance of any of the proposals that the First Minister and I had been working on. We referred it to arbitrators, and they have made their report. We received and accepted recommendations. They have been the subject of further feedback, and we now have a further report from the arbitrators. The Member will be aware that there does not seem to be any wider or more enthusiastic acceptance of the arbitrators’ recommendations from the community interests than for any of the previous proposals that the First Minister and I worked on.


My point arises out of Mr Ford’s question about a counter-sectarianism strategy. Does the Deputy First Minister not agree that there is a duty on us all — the political parties and civil society — and not just on the Executive or on the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister to counteract sectarianism, in whatever form?
I come from north Belfast and represent North Belfast, and we have seen the worst examples of sectarianism. On Saturday night and Sunday night there were further attacks in the Skegoneill area, so I have some knowledge of the situation. Does the Deputy First Minister agree that the only way to tackle sectarianism is to mobilise society, including the political parties?


I agree with the Member, and that is why the First Minister and I decided to convene meetings with the political parties as well as meetings with social partners. This needs community-wide mobilisation. It is not enough simply to deplore sectarian violence where it happens: we must confront, challenge and eradicate sectarianism from society. It is not enough for us to be working in shared institutions: we must ensure that we build a truly shared society. We must ensure that people in all walks of life in all parts of this city, and elsewhere, can live in safety and harmony with their neighbours. That is a huge challenge for us all. We can all be good at pointing out sectarianism in others. Let us confront prejudice in all its forms. That will be a significant challenge for us all — not just for the political parties.


Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. I offer my sympathy, and that of my party, to the Deputy First Minister on the passing of his mother, comhbhrón ónár gcroí.
Will the Deputy First Minister comment on the recent initiative taken by the Belfast Lord Mayor, Alex Maskey, as part of his contribution towards the campaign to counter sectarianism?


I thank Mr McElduff and take this opportunity to thank all Members who have expressed condolences to me and other family members on the death of my mother. That thanks extends to staff and officials in the Assembly and to journalists.
I attended the anti-sectarianism rally convened by the Lord Mayor of Belfast and Belfast City Council. I said then, and have said since, that it was a commendable initiative. In the past such measures have been led by the trade union movement, and it continues to be positively and proactively involved. It was right and proper for the council and the Lord Mayor to step forward as they did. I hope that their work for good relations bears fruit, and I hope that that happens in all council chambers. Sectarianism and sectarian attacks have not been confined to Belfast. Although sectarianism has a profile and concentration in the Belfast area, sectarianism has reigned havoc in the lives of innocent people in Larne, Coleraine and elsewhere.


I join other Members in extending my sympathy, and that of my party, to the Deputy First Minister on the death of this mother.
In addressing the issue of sectarianism, and the steps needed to combat it, the Deputy First Minister talked about community involvement. But are not the essential community leaders the leaders of the political parties and elected representatives in the Assembly? The deputy chief constable and other members of the security forces acknowledge that paramilitaries are behind the increasing escalation of violence and confrontation in Belfast and other areas and that those paramilitaries are fronted by political parties in the Assembly among others. Bearing that in mind, is it not time that the Executive and the Assembly brought collective and political pressure to bear on those parties representing the organisations that are fermenting and escalating the violence that we wish to combat?


In previous answers I expressed my belief that all political parties share a real responsibility to challenge sectarianism and ongoing paramilitary violence. We must be universal, and as unequivocal as possible, in our condemnation of all paramilitary activity. In the past, unfortunately, there has been an element of "whataboutery", whereby people have tried to excuse or explain one form of paramilitary activity on the back of other forms of it. We must move beyond that, because the whole community wants to know that those who call themselves democrats repudiate paramilitarism in any form and see no justification for it. In a united way, we must make it clear to paramilitaries that they have no right to attack anyone in this society, nor any right to purport to defend anyone.

Discussions with Prime Minister or Taoiseach

3. asked the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister to detail any recent discussions with (a) the Prime Minister or (b) the Taoiseach.
(AQO14/02)


The last joint meeting that the Deputy First Minister and I had with the Prime Minister and with the Taoiseach was at the British-Irish Council meeting in Jersey on 14 June. In addition to the joint meeting there have been several individual meetings.


During any such meetings, did the subject of the implications of the 11 September atrocity arise and hence, by implication, what best Northern Ireland can do to play its part in combating international terrorism?


We approach the first anniversary of the terrible atrocity of 11 September, which crystallised for everyone the tremendous threat that international terrorism has posed for the world. In our own way, I am sure that we are committed to opposing the continuance of terrorism in any form. All the parties that endorsed the agreement affirmed, in its initial paragraphs, their absolute commitment to "peaceful means" and their opposition to the
"use or threat of force … whether in regard to this agreement or otherwise."
The phrase "or otherwise" is not qualified. If a party here or an organisation in Northern Ireland has been involved in assisting terrorist organisations elsewhere, as has the Republican movement, it is in breach of its undertakings in the agreement. One would want to know whether all such actions in support of terrorism outside Northern Ireland have ceased and whether the party in question has maintained its connections with ETA and the now illegal Herri Batasuna party. It would, of course, be contrary to the agreement for that party to maintain those connections.


Does the First Minister agree that, in the context of Northern Ireland, the only way to deal authentically with the involvement of terrorists is to make sure that the representatives and leaders of an organisation such as the IRA, which is now operating at the heart of international terrorism, do not continue to participate in the Government of Northern Ireland. Mr Trimble’s responsibility is, if needs be, to end that involvement by collapsing the Executive.


It is open to Mr Roche, if he finds it uncomfortable in the Chamber, to leave it.

Maze Site

4. asked the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister what discussions have taken place with the Ministry of Defence regarding the removal of contaminated materials from the Maze site.
(AQO35/02)


We understand that diesel contamination was found at the Ministry of Defence site at Long Kesh, adjacent to Maze Prison. Remedial work has now been completed, and levels are below those prescribed. A six-month monitoring has recently begun to ensure that the levels remain within the required limits.
The Northern Ireland Office is not aware of any contamination on the Maze prison site.


I thank the Deputy First Minister for his response. Will he further ascertain whether other contamination has taken place? I have heard allegations that toxic materials were disposed of at the Maze site during the 1970s. I have also been informed that asbestos may have been dumped there. It would be difficult to develop the site unless some form of decontamination took place. I ask that it be fully investigated to ascertain whether there are any materials that might be dangerous to the public if the site were developed.


I am not aware of the contamination that the Member has referred to or has heard allegations of, but since he has brought the matter to the OFMDFM’s attention, it will be pursued to enable us to be fully aware of what material is on the site and what the condition of the site is.


The Deputy First Minister appreciates that one of Belfast’s great natural assets is its hills — Castlereagh, Cavehill, Black Mountain and Divis Mountain. Mindful that the Black Mountain has been ravaged by quarrying — more for private profit than to meet public need — has the Deputy First Minister raised the issue of the Ministry of Defence’s disposal of land at Divis Mountain? What steps can be taken to ensure that public access to that land continues and develops?


If the Minister can see a connection with the question he is a better man than I am — but then he is a better man than I am.


The connection, I assume, is the disposal of Ministry of Defence land. The Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister is aware of the community’s strong interest in the future use of the land at Divis Mountain, and it knows that there have been discussions involving the Ministry of Defence, the National Trust and the Heritage Lottery Fund. We support the objective of making land at Divis Mountain accessible in the future. The Department of the Environment has been keeping in touch with those issues. The land was not included in the reinvestment and reform initiative on the basis that the Ministry of Defence believed that the future of the land had been settled through negotiations with the National Trust.

Funding of Women’s Groups

5. asked the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister to make a statement on its current and proposed policy regarding the funding of women’s groups.
(AQO22/02)


Women’s groups are an integral part of the community and voluntary sector. A recent position paper on the funding of women’s organisations concluded that there was a need to identify an interim measure to support the work of women’s organisations. An interdepartmental working group, jointly chaired by the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister and the Department for Social Development, commissioned and considered research by the women’s support network on potential and actual job and service losses, and it also explored options to secure funding for this measure.
The working group concluded that the most effective way forward was to make an Executive programme fund bid for a share of the £6 million announced in July by the Executive. The purpose of the bid is to maintain important voluntary community sector services that are facing short-term financial difficulties. The Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister and the Department for Social Development have worked together on behalf of the working group to produce a cross-departmental bid to sustain many services, including those delivered by women’s organisations. That bid is supported by several other Departments.


On behalf of the Women’s Coalition, I extend my condolences to the Deputy First Minister on the death of his mother.
I am slightly reassured by the First Minister’s answer, but nonetheless I am concerned about the delay and the length of time it has taken. Will the First Minister confirm how many meetings have taken place about this urgent issue? Last week, Members may have received, as I did, faxes from a women’s centre explaining that it had received a large capital grant to build a brand new building, which opened recently, only to discover last Friday that it was closing its doors. An urgent meeting of the management had been called to tell everyone that they were shutting up shop. Windsor Women’s Centre in the Village area, the Shankill women’s centre and many others are having the same crisis. We can no longer wait for decisions that take such a long time. When will the money be delivered at ground level? All of the centres could be faced with closure.


The bid to the Executive programme funds for a share of the £6 million will come before the Executive later this month, so something may develop from that. I understand the general point that the Member makes because of the reduction in the amount —


I must interrupt the First Minister because the time for questions to the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister is up. Perhaps the First Minister will give the balance of his answer to the Member in writing.

Regional Development

I wish to inform the House that question 17, standing in the name of Mrs Annie Courtney, has been withdrawn and will receive a written answer.

Car Theft

1. asked the Minister for Regional Development what discussions he has had with PSNI regarding the incidence of car theft from on-street car parking in Belfast.
(AQO19/02)


Car theft from on-street car parking is a law and order issue and, as such, my Department has not been advised or approached by the Police Service. It may be of little interest to the Member, but a record is kept of the incidences of car theft from off-street car parks in the eastern division. Those records show that three cars have been stolen in the past six months.


I have been informed by other sources that many cars stolen in the Belfast city area are from unattended on-street car parking areas and are principally left by commuters during office hours. What is the Minister doing, or what does he intend to do, to promote public transport and/or move towards residents car parking schemes to reduce the number of cars parked on-street, which are particularly vulnerable to theft?
(Mr Deputy Speaker [Mr McClelland] in the Chair)


As I said, I have no ministerial responsibility in that area. However, the hon Member will be interested to know that I voted against the organisational changes in the Police Service that have left it with a shortfall in finance, manpower and organisation.


Dr Birnie touched on the subject of my supplementary question. What plans does the Minister have to introduce residents parking schemes in Northern Ireland?


The Department for Regional Development has the statutory power under the Road Traffic Regulation (Northern Ireland) Order 1997 to introduce residents parking schemes. While the Department has identified some pilot residents parking schemes to test the necessary administrative enforcement procedures, the Assembly will be aware and will appreciate that those schemes will benefit local residents only if they are effectively enforced. In Northern Ireland, unlike the rest of the UK, that is solely a matter for the police or, in some cases, traffic wardens.
Regrettably, during discussions on the issue, the police have stated that they would be unable to undertake the necessary enforcement work in relation to such schemes. It, therefore, seems unlikely that the Roads Service will be able to progress the matter in the short term, and enforcement of residents parking schemes may have to await primary legislation for the decriminalisation of parking enforcement.

Sewerage Infrastructure

2. asked the Minister for Regional Development to detail any forward plans for capital development of the sewerage infrastructure in the Lagan Valley constituency for each of the next four years.
(AQO36/02)


Over the next four years, the Water Service proposes to invest £8 million on upgrading the sewerage infrastructure in the Lagan Valley constituency. That comprises £1·7 million in 2002-03, £3million in 2003-04, £1·7 million in 2004-05 and a further £1·6 million in 2005-06. The upgrading work includes the construction of 10 new wastewater treatment works at locations including Aghalee, Dromore, Glenavy and Annahilt. In the longer term, the Water Service proposes to refurbish sewerage networks across the constituency at a cost of £12 million. In view of available funding and other priorities, it is likely to be 2007 before the work can commence.


The basis for my question was the announcement by the Minister of the Environment of a moratorium on development that has not received outline permission. Will the Minister for Regional Development assure us that the matter will be addressed, and that urgently needed development will not be hindered as a result of the Minister of the Environment’s statement on the Environment and Heritage Service?


The Minister of the Environment and I met to discuss issues relating to the Environment and Heritage Service, the Water Service and the assessed hot-spot areas. I plan to meet Mr Nesbitt again this Wednesday further to our having jointly tasked our officials to examine the issues involved and to propose appropriate action.
Northern Ireland’s infrastructure has been seriously underfunded for many years, and there is a significant backlog in the provision of water and sewerage services. Consequently, we must spend about £3 billion in the next 20 years. That means that an additional £50 million a year beyond the present expenditure estimates will be required. Therefore, it will take a long time and considerable expenditure to solve all the problems.
Programmes have already been scheduled to deal with the hot spots in the Member’s constituency of Lagan Valley. Given that there is a programme to deal with issues of concern, it is not unreasonable for the planners to allow development to proceed.


I welcome the Minister’s answer. Is he satisfied that the problem that I raised about sewerage provision in the Glenmore area of Hilden has been resolved?


As I recall, that was an odour problem. The Water Service commissioned a survey, the publication of which is imminent. As soon as the results become available, I will let Mr Davis know the outcome and what action my Department will take.


I thank the Minister for his replies, particularly those concerning forward plans and the areas marked for investment. Did the Minister mention the Fort Road area of the Lagan Valley constituency, where pipes leak constantly and there is no main sewer? If that area is not on the list, will the Minister examine the matter and reply in writing, if necessary?


I am not familiar with the geography of that area, and to tell me that there are leaking pipes there does not help to define the case, because there are so many leaking pipes in Northern Ireland. I will ask my Department for the details of that site, and I will contact Mr Close about it.

Water and Sewerage Systems

3. asked the Minister for Regional Development when he will bring forward proposals to the Executive and the Assembly to address the problems in the water and sewerage systems.
(AQO47/02)


The Water Service must invest an additional £500 million over the next 10 years to comply with European Directives on water quality, to respond to increasing demand and to upgrade ageing infrastructure.
I inherited a legacy of more than 30 years of underinvestment in water and sewerage services when I took up the regional development portfolio in November 1999. Since then, I have vigorously pursued all possible options to address that historic funding shortfall and to ensure the delivery of efficient and effective water and sewerage services to customers.
The Water Service’s total capital investment in the next 20 years amounts to approximately £3 billion. Currently, the Water Service is finalising a comprehensive review of the condition and investment requirements of all surface and underground water and sewerage infrastructure. That exercise takes account of the increasingly stringent European standards for water quality and wastewater treatment that the Water Service must meet.
The data are being used to prepare an asset management plan (NIAMP 2), which will define the level of capital investment required for the next 20 years, together with the associated operational requirements for the next 10 years and how and where that investment should be targeted. NIAMP 2 will be finalised towards the end of 2002. I will present the plan to the Assembly next year, when I will also present my options for funding the strategy. Those options will comprise a combination of continued public expenditure funding, the use of public-private partnerships, alternative funding proposals such as developer contributions and the investment potential offered under the reinvestment and reform initiative’s new borrowing powers. I await with interest the outcome of the consultation on the review of rating policy and its consideration of the future funding options for the Water Service.


I thank the Minister for his comprehensive answer. Considering Mr Poots’s question, there are many more questions that I would have liked to ask. How dependable is the time frame, and how quickly does the Minister hope to bring it before the Assembly?


We are on schedule to meet the timetable that has been set out. The time restrictions that are of greatest concern are those that have been set down by the European Union. Under European regulations, Northern Ireland is in default of a number of Directives, and the majority of infraction proceedings against the United Kingdom from Europe relate to Northern Ireland. The outcome could be a massive imposition on the funding of the Northern Ireland block. It is reckoned that the United Kingdom could face fines amounting to tens of millions of pounds if the infractions are not dealt with.
I want the Water Service to spend its money on improving the quality of its network, not on paying fines, because I suspect that the Treasury would not bear the cost of any infraction proceedings and would be likely to pass it off by way of a penalty on the Northern Ireland block. Therefore, at the very time when we needed more money to deal with the causes of infractions, we would have to spend money on paying fines. We have already passed some of the deadlines without being able to remedy the causes.


The Minister has touched on some of the difficulties leading to hold-ups in planning permission. Is the Water Service responsible for the refusals?


Ultimately, any development decision is a planning issue, and the decision will have to be taken by the Planning Service. In doing so, it will have to take into account the views of the agencies it consults with. Among those agencies are the Water Service and the Environment and Heritage Service. To the best of my knowledge, in the Member’s constituency of Strangford, the Water Service is not objecting to any development on the basis of incapacity in its sewerage network. However, there are serious issues. The House supports the Environment and Heritage Service, as we do not want substandard wastewater treatment, and we do not want effluent on our beaches and around the coast.
Clearly, it is a concern that must be dealt with. The pragmatic approach has to be whether the Water Service has proposals that will, in time, deal with the problem. If there is under-capacity in a wastewater treatment works, and there is a proposal to deal with that under-capacity, the sensible approach would be to allow development to take place providing it does not cause a great problem before improvement is made.
If that sensible approach is taken it will resolve the problem of an overwhelming number of hot spots. It is to be hoped that later this week the Minister of the Environment and I will be able to resolve some of the problems on the basis of a useful meeting that we have already had and the work that has been carried out with officials since then.


The Minister told the House that responsibility for the Water Service lies with him, and him alone. Would he, therefore, explain why he chose not to visit the lower Ormeau Road at the time of severe flooding — when people were traumatised after sewage came into their homes for the third time? Perhaps he would have seen for himself the urgency of fitting pumps that work. In that case there were modern pumps, but they completely failed. Would he assure the community of River Terrace that he will come out and talk to them?


Members are aware that many properties across the Province were flooded. If the Minister were expected to call at every house that is flooded, he would not have the opportunity to remedy the situation. My Colleague, during his time in office, visited the Ormeau Road area. There is no reason to believe that, if time were available, I would not do the same.
As a constituency Member I have seen flooding in many circumstances. I understand the serious concerns that people have when flooding occurs and the upheaval that it causes. I want to resolve those problems. My time is best used doing that, rather than meeting people for public relations purposes. However, I am happy to meet people if the Member wants to bring them to me, or wants to make an arrangement with me. I have no aversion to visiting the Ormeau Road. I am happy to speak to people and to hear their concerns.

Light Rail Services

4. asked the Minister for Regional Development to make a statement on the development of light rail services in the Greater Belfast area.
(AQO48/02)


The regional transportation strategy for Northern Ireland 2002-12 includes £100 million for the commencement of a rapid transit network for Belfast. The development of that network will be taken forward against the backdrop of the Belfast metropolitan transport plan, which is currently being prepared. I regard that initiative as extremely important. Over the next few weeks I will set up a dedicated project team to begin detailed preparatory work. Part of that work will examine a range of possible options for such a network, including light rail.


I welcome the Minister’s answer. Although I appreciate that contracts have been signed for new train sets, I must point out to the Minister that extended and improved park-and-ride facilities on the Larne line have been successful. Bearing that in mind, would he agree that the real potential for improving public transport lies with the development of a light rail system in the Greater Belfast area?


With regard to the Greater Belfast area, I believe that the prospects of getting people out of their cars would be vastly improved it there were a rapid transport system. The Member keeps talking about light rail. However, there are several options — guided buses; a tram system of hybrid vehicles that can go on rails and on the road at certain points, and light rail. I am not making up my mind on the options at this time. However, a dedicated project team will be set up to consider which route is appropriate for a pilot scheme — many people have assumed it will be the E-way — to establish the best vehicle for the scheme and, perhaps, leave open the option of upgrading if that seems to be appropriate.
It would clearly be in the interests of the overall project if, along the route of such a rapid transit scheme, there were appropriate park-and-ride facilities. That kind of modern and speedy transport system would be more likely to catch the imagination of people in the Greater Belfast area and, therefore, more likely to get them out of their cars and onto public transport. However, that only deals with the Greater Belfast area, and only part of it at that. We are considering other proposals, such as quality bus corridors, which would go along other routes to assist in encouraging public transport use by providing a more reliable and faster way into the city centre. Therefore, one should not rule out the prospect of more quality bus corridors. The regional transportation strategy draws attention to their potential.


Will the Minister undertake to ensure that proper infrastructural links are in place to facilitate the use of any projected Belfast light railway by those living in the Greater Belfast travel-to-work area? I refer specifically to those who live in east Antrim, who must currently struggle with an inadequate road system, epitomised by the A2 between Newtownabbey and Carrickfergus, and antiquated rail provision, and where the opportunity for a quality bus service does not currently exist.


The regional transportation strategy, even though it only goes up to 2012, showed that in the longer term, within the 25 years of the regional development strategy, there was the potential, not simply to have a rapid transit route, but to have a rapid transit network. One of the illustrative drawings in the regional transportation strategy showed an east-west route and a north-south route. If successful, there might even be an orbital route as well.
If there were east-west and north-south routes, having routes from the outlying areas to feed in to those networks would make good sense and ensure that the full potential was reached. The more customers for those kinds of routes, the better the service can be. The better the service, the more likely customers are to use it.


Ards Borough Council and the Strangford constituency are interested in the light rail service. Is the Minister prepared to consider extending any rapid transit system to Comber and Newtownards?


It is intended to run a pilot rapid transit system under the regional transportation strategy, from which we will learn much about the potential for that form of transport, whether it is tram or light rail, to attract the normal road user onto public transport. The more successful the pilot scheme, the greater the opportunity for extending it will be.
The Member’s question is along the same lines as that of the Member for East Antrim, Mr Ken Robinson. Even if the rapid transit corridor were not to be extended into Comber and Newtownards, those areas would be ideal for bringing vehicles onto it, if the corridor from Dundonald into Belfast was being used. Whether it would be buses or another form of public transport, it would bring those areas into the rapid transit network, and they would gain from the faster journey times into Belfast from that point.

Unadopted Roads

5. asked the Minister for Regional Development to detail the number of unadopted roads rejected by the Department in each of the last five years on the grounds that they had not been brought up to the required standard.
(AQO65/02)


I take it that the Member’s question relates to long-standing unadopted roads rather than to roads in new housing developments. There are many such private roads and laneways across Northern Ireland that have not been adopted into the public road network. As they are private roads, the Roads Service does not have exact details, but it is estimated that there are about 62 km throughout Northern Ireland.
Over the years, there have been many requests for private roads to be adopted, although details are not tabulated. Unfortunately, very few of them are fit for adoption. To bring all private roads in Northern Ireland up to the necessary standard for adoption would cost approximately £14 million, excluding the cost of land, service alterations and accommodation works, which would substantially increase the sum.


The infrastructure of long-standing roads has been neglected for many years in several district council areas. Does the Minister have any plans to bring some of those roads into the circle and improve their infrastructure for the benefit of residents?


I am reluctant to get a reputation for girning about my inheritance in the Department for Regional Development. However, in addition to the problems with the Water Service, there were also problems with roads and transportation. The regional transportation strategy recognised that considerable work was necessary, which would involve a considerable sum of money. In order to meet the priorities that had been set out for the next 10 years, it was necessary to increase the public expenditure extrapolated over the 10-year period by about £1·3 billion or £1·4 billion. The Assembly would probably recognise that it is better to deal with those priorities, which were unanimously agreed on, before taking on more responsibilities. There would be a local advantage in having some of the unadopted roads adopted. To do so requires them to be brought up to standard. I understand that Dungannon and South Tyrone Borough Council in the Member’s constituency had considered the possibility of using ratepayers’ funds to make some impact in that area, although I suspect that the Minister of the Environment would not greatly encourage that. In the meantime, I can give no solace about unadopted roads. Our priority must be the programme that the Assembly agreed under the regional transportation strategy.


Does the Minister acknowledge that some developers continue to be slow about bringing roads and sewerage systems up to departmental standards and that the Department needs to use increased vigour to force those developers to bring roads, footpaths and sewers up to standard so that the residents do not have to endure inferior utilities? Does he agree that the Department must also ensure that the bonds that are put up by developers are drawn down more readily so that the public are not inconvenienced?


That is a fair point. When completion of roads to adoption standard by developers does not occur within a reasonable period from the date of the occupation of houses, the Private Streets (Northern Ireland) Order 1980, as amended, enables the Roads Service to complete the necessary work at the expense of developers. Such action is normally initiated only after efforts to persuade the developers to meet their obligations have proved unsuccessful, and each case is considered on its merits. My Department has no plan to introduce any further legislation, because it believes that the current legislation is appropriate. If developers have not carried out their responsibilities, the Department usually takes action approximately one year after the date of occupation. If the Member wishes, the Department can examine the appropriateness of that time period and consider whether it can be brought forward.

Belfast to Bangor Railway Line

6. asked the Minister for Regional Development what progress has been made in relaying the Belfast to Bangor railway line.
(AQO20/02)


Translink has advised me that the relay work between Bangor and Belfast is complete and that full, scheduled services are now in operation.


The Minister kindly wrote to me in August setting out details of the project management chaos and the additional costs associated with the relaying of the Bangor to Belfast line, which he has already spoken about in the House. What lessons have been learned from that? What are the implications for future line relaying, particularly the Whitehead line, and is such work likely to incur additional costs?


Northern Ireland Railways outsourced the project management on that stretch of the line. Last November, it dispensed with the services of the project management team and took over the work itself. It has meant a considerable delay in the initial timescale, and the Member is right to draw attention to the indication that project costs will have been exceeded. I do not yet have a final figure for the cost of the work; it was originally in the region of £9·5 million. It was then determined, however, that a more enhanced scheme should be adopted, and that was estimated at £14·7 million.
The estimates are now rumoured to be considerably in excess of that figure. However, Northern Ireland Railways is considering the possibility of legal action arising from contractual issues, which, if successful, will significantly reduce the amount of the excess.


Although I welcome the laying of new track throughout the Northern Ireland network and not only on the Bangor-Belfast line, can the Minister tell us when we shall have new trains?


Perhaps the Minister would be brief.


We shall take possession of the first train in December 2003. That train will be used to commission further trains, and others will follow fairly shortly. I cannot say which line the first train will run on: that is an operational decision.


Unfortunately, time is up. I am sure that the Minister will give Mr Hutchinson a written answer.

The Environment
Mobile Telecommunications Masts

1. asked the Minister of the Environment to detail the number of planning applications for mobile telecommunications masts that were (a) submitted; (b) refused; (c) granted; and (d) withdrawn (i) in the six months prior to the introduction of new departmental guidelines, Planning Policy Statement 10 (PPS 10); and (ii) since the introduction of the new guidelines.
(AQO67/02)


A total of 271 full planning and prior approval applications was received in respect of telecommunication development in the six months prior to the introduction of the new guidelines, under Planning Policy Statement 10, from 11 April 2002. Of those, 37 were refused, 183 were granted and 51 were withdrawn. A total of 185 full planning and prior approval applications has been received since the introduction of the new guidelines. Of these, 18 were refused, 127 were granted and 20 were withdrawn. The remaining 20 applications remain under consideration.
The Planning (General Development) (Amendment) Order (Northern Ireland) 2002 came into operation on 21 June 2002. That legislation removes existing permitted development rights from telecommunications code system operators and requires full planning permission for new telecommunications development, including masts.


I thank the Minister for his full reply. Given the public’s perception of the health implications of masts, as well as their unsightliness, will the guidelines curtail their installation throughout the North?


My aim is for sustainable development; namely, that Northern Ireland will have a modern telecommunication industry, which industry needs, and that we will protect the environment. With regard to perceptions about the effects of telecommunications masts on health, I remind Mr Kelly that it is his Minister, Minister de Brún, who gives me advice on that aspect. I act on that advice. I am not responsible for health matters, nor have I knowledge of them. I take guidance from others.


Will the Minister explain what monitoring of emissions from mobile masts has been undertaken? What are the results?


The Stewart Report, published two years ago, advised that an independent, random audit should be carried out, especially on those masts situated in sensitive areas such as school premises. Last year, masts in the grounds of 100 schools were randomly tested, and the emissions recorded were many thousands of times below the levels recommended by health authorities. This year, tests are also being conducted on masts in the grounds of hospitals. I advise Members who want more information to visit www.radio.gov.uk.


The Minister will agree that many people’s concerns about telecommunications masts have not decreased. Has the new legislation introduced by the Minister addressed those concerns?


Residents are mainly concerned with their health — one current application has generated 200 objections, all of which are based on possible health risks. Mr Shannon will recall that when he last spoke on the subject, his mobile phone rang in the Chamber. He will also know that a Colleague of his, Mr Wells, has told the Assembly that he owned a mobile phone and had used it to rescue someone when walking in the Mournes. We live in a society where mobile phones exist, and I must deal with residents’ concerns in a pragmatic and balanced manner.

Moratorium on Planning Approvals

2. asked the Minister of the Environment to outline (a) his position regarding the moratorium on planning approvals due to pressures on the sewerage infrastructure and (b) the specific areas affected in Northern Ireland.
(AQO121/02)

Planning Applications

3. asked the Minister of the Environment to detail, by district council area, the number of planning applications affected by the moratorium resulting from objections regarding the discharge of wastewater that does not meet EC standards for water quality; and to make a statement.
(AQO66/02)


There is no moratorium on planning approvals in Northern Ireland. The Department has a statutory duty to promote the conservation and cleanliness of water resources. It must also take account of the requirements of EU Directives that safeguard water quality.
In recent months, the Environment and Heritage Service (EHS) has highlighted concerns over the quality of discharges and risk of water pollution from sewage treatment plants and sewerage networks at several locations in Northern Ireland. This has raised complex legal, environmental and operational issues. While urgent discussions are held between my Department and the Department for Regional Development, which is responsible for wastewater treatment, decisions on planning applications in the affected areas are on hold as a precautionary measure.
Planning Service and EHS are consulting on 588 planning applications in Northern Ireland, a breakdown of which by Planning Service division is: Downpatrick 257; Ballymena 166; Omagh 95; Belfast 52; Londonderry 9; Enniskillen 4; Coleraine 3; and Craigavon 2. I will write to Ms Morrice when a breakdown by district council area is available. That information will also be placed in the Assembly Library. Planning applications that do not require connection to the sewerage network, such as extensions to houses or garages, continue to be processed to conclusion by the Planning Service.
I am acutely aware of the concerns that the development industry and public representatives have about this precautionary step. I announced recently that the Planning Service would now process to decision stage those development proposals that have received outline planning approval but are being held back as a precaution. I met the Minister for Regional Development, and we tasked our officials to formulate recommendations to resolve the difficulties by mid-September. Those recommendations will specify locations where the sewage pollution problems dictate that particular attention must be paid to water quality issues when planning decisions are being made.
I am determined to achieve an early, balanced and pragmatic resolution that will meet Northern Ireland’s development needs while simultaneously protecting the environment, and I plan to make an early statement to the Assembly to that effect.


I listened with interest to the Minister’s response. It seems that there is a lot of confusion. We appreciate that a resolution is necessary because more and more untreated sewage is flowing into places such as Belfast Lough and, particularly, Ballyholme Bay, and that is disgraceful. I should like confirmation from the Minister that planning approvals have not been blocked anywhere in north Down. I did not hear any specific reference to north Down in his list. I want clarification on that, because the sewerage system cannot be overloaded in places such as Briggs Rock.
I also want to know exactly what discussions are taking place with the Minister for Regional Development, because it seems from a reply that Mr P Robinson gave that the failings of the sewerage systems mean that planning applications are not proceeding is not equally appreciated in both Departments.


I am sorry that Ms Morrice is confused, although this is not the first time that she has been confused when she has spoken in the Assembly. The Planning Service in Northern Ireland is split into divisions. I told her that there are 257 planning applications in Downpatrick. We learnt in a debate in May that the treatment works in the Downpatrick division are all right again or will be, so I am clear about what I have said. I have also suggested that the breakdown by district council area, which I hope will help Ms Morrice, will be available in the Library and will be sent to her.
Ms Morrice’s second point was that the Minister for Regional Development said something different to what I did. I know what he said, and I welcome it. He made it clear at the outset that there has been a difficulty with sewage since direct rule. He talked about £3 billion being needed over the next 20 years, which is £50 million a year. He also said that he wants to support the Environment and Heritage Service. He said that he and I had had a very good meeting, and Hansard will show that. Let us not have people trying to pull the Minister for Regional Development and me apart: we and our officials are working together to try to resolve a problem, and the Assembly is about working together to provide solutions for the people of Northern Ireland.
Let me emphasise this: I concur with the Minister for Regional Development that there is a problem with sewage treatment works in Northern Ireland — only 57 % of them are up to national standard. In Great Britain, 95 % are up to national standard. However, from the EC Urban Waste Water Treatment Directive, it appears that only 35 % of sewage treatment works are up to standard, so there is a problem: money is needed, and we are trying to approach that difficulty pragmatically and realistically.


Before I call the next Member, I wish to remind the House of the importance of brevity in questions and answers.


The Minister is probably aware that Members are being strongly lobbied on this. I understood that a previous moratorium had been lifted, but the Minister has told the House that a precautionary measure has been implemented. Is the Minister aware that many jobs are at stake while that precautionary measure exists?
I brought the matter to the Minister’s attention before when Newcastle lost its blue flag status over the sewage works. What has been done as a precaution to get that status reinstated in Newcastle?


I am glad that the word "moratorium" has been mentioned again. The precise wording that went to the divisional planning offices was as follows:
"no applications are taken to Council with opinions to refuse on the basis of waste management unit (WMU) advice for the present."
We were trying to facilitate development. If we had acted upon the Environment and Heritage Service’s recommendation, refusals would have been made to the council. Our advice was to wait until a further, detailed examination had been carried out. When a planning application is made, further detail is often sought before a decision is made. Therefore, a moratorium has not been imposed; rather a waste management precaution has been introduced. There is no problem with extensions to houses.
I am conscious of the jobs aspect and have met the Construction Employers Federation and, for example, Derry City Council to explain the situation. Those bodies appreciate the problem and our efforts to resolve the difficulty of inadequate infrastructure while protecting the environment. There are strong needs, and we want to provide solutions.


The Minister is aware of my concern about the matter. His attention was first drawn to it when I highlighted the serious situation in Ballyclare, in my constituency, where identifiable household bathroom waste had been entering the Sixmilewater River for years because the local sewage treatment works was working at 60% overload. When I first brought a deputation to the Minister, he was shocked by the news.
Will the Minister take into account the Department for Regional Development’s future capital build programme? A balance should be achieved between the need for environmental protection and the need for development. More importantly, will the Minister inform district councils, when they are being consulted by the Planning Service, if the Environment and Heritage Service and the Department for Regional Development have advised that infrastructure — principally, sewage treatment, but also roads — would not support development? It is at that stage that the public can express its views about local circumstances.


Mr Wilson did bring the Ballyclare case to my attention. The Department must strike a pragmatic balance between dealing with developers’ concerns and preventing pollution.
The Department of the Environment will take into account the Department for Regional Development’s future capital build programme, identifying how much capital there is, the level of pollution that might result from development, and for how long development should be held back, taking into account when capital will be available. The Department must marry the capital throughput to the Department for Regional Development with the position as regards infrastructure and the need for more capital.
The second part of Mr Wilson’s questions concerned infastructure not supporting development and informing district councils. I have no problem signing up to that. This is open Government, and I want the problems to be known. Only when district councils and residents know the problems will we be able to address the solutions and progress together.

Contracts

4. asked the Minister of the Environment to outline (a) how many contracts, to what value, and in what departmental areas, have been forwarded to the public procurement board for consideration and inclusion in the pilot studies for procurement policy; (b) what measures are being undertaken to assess each departmental contract for inclusion in the pilot studies; and to make a statement.
(AQO59/02)


Further to the procurement board’s decision on 3 July 2002 to undertake a pilot study on the use of public procurement contracts to help the unemployed back to work, my Department examined all contracts to be advertised over the next six to nine months. A service contract in the Environment and Heritage Service has been identified as meeting the criteria set out in the pilot study by the procurement board.
The contract is for the recruitment of tour guides to work at various locations throughout Northern Ireland. It is valued at £300,000 and involves the recruitment of permanent and temporary staff. The start date for the contract is expected to be November this year. The relevant details will be passed to the public procurement board later this week.


I acknowledge that the Department of the Environment is one of only four Departments that have forwarded possible contracts to the public procurement board. The Minister’s answer is helpful, but it is hardly reassuring that, despite the efforts of his Department, only one contract at a total value of £300,000 has been identified as suitable for inclusion in the pilot scheme. Given that 20 such schemes are proposed under the policy, is the Minister satisfied that there are not other areas in the Department of the Environment where contracts of greater worth might be identified for inclusion in the scheme?


I thank Mr Attwood for recognising that the Department of the Environment is one of only four Departments to submit projects. However, I remind him that there is a financial limitation on contracts. In the construction industry the contracts must be worth between £1 million and £3·86 million, and for projects in the service industry the contracts must be worth between £250,000 and £500,000. That is not an inconsequential amount of money, particularly given that the Department of the Environment is primarily a regulatory body and that, as such, its expenditure is dominated by staff costs and support to counsel. I also remind Mr Attwood that the Department of the Environment’s budget amounts to about £118 million a year. Given the magnitude of those figures and that my Department is one of the four Departments to respond, Mr Attwood should say " Well done" and stop at that.

Wake Up To Waste Campaign

5. asked the Minister of the Environment to give an update on the Wake Up to Waste campaign.
(AQO46/02)


Phase 1 of the Wake up to Waste campaign generated an excellent response. Several district councils and contractors reported increases of up to 30% in recyclable materials collected. People want to participate and to have the opportunity to take action to enhance their environment. I am pleased with the approach.
Phase 2 of the campaign starts in October. It will provide guidance on the practical steps members of the public can take in their everyday activities to reduce waste. It will focus on the things that we can all do to reduce, reuse and recycle, such as reusing plastic carrier bags. We are establishing a retail partnership to communicate that message to consumers and to promote sustainable waste management practices.
During the summer the Environment and Heritage Service also completed a pilot education programme, which was delivered to two schools in each of the 26 council areas.


I welcome phase 2 of the campaign, as I know that phase 1 was successful. Some £500,000 was invested in phase 1. How much will be invested in the second phase? Given the amount of paper that many Members are gathering, will the Minister’s Department take the lead in using recycled paper?


I like the second part of the question — we lead by example. A total of £1·5 million over three years has been committed to the public awareness aspect of the campaign. One would think therefore that £500,000 is available to be spent each year. However, I am very conscious that the public must be made aware of the problem. Ten per cent of households in Northern Ireland responded to the questionnaire. Those who responded clearly want to play their part, and we must therefore provide a solution for them.
We will continue to educate the people of Northern Ireland further on that.
Regarding recyclable paper and public procurement in general, I agree that this Administration should lead by example in a whole raft of ways. It is difficult for us in the Administration to ask others to do things that we are not prepared to do. I sympathise and empathise with the second part of the question.


Will the Minister give assurances that his Department will ensure that community-based initiatives, as opposed to just individual ones, will play a major part in this programme?


Individuals make up the community, and the community is very important. Commencing in October, and building on what we did last year, we will have regular meetings with the regional communication co-ordinators and the local authority recycling officers, who are the people with links to the community. We will continue to work with the community, and we plan to produce a community guide to waste management, aimed at community groups, which will contain practical information on how to reduce, reuse and recycle.


Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. I am delighted to hear the Minister being so enthusiastic about the issue of waste paper. You need look no further than the Assembly to see the amount of waste paper going through our offices. In phase 2 will the Minister address the issue of introducing disposable paper bags and doing away with the plastic bags that clutter our environment and cost so much money to clear — a scheme which has been introduced successfully in the South of Ireland?


I am tempted, but I will not say anything about the waste paper caused by the number of languages we use. The Minister of Health, Social Services and Public Safety is here, so I shall refrain from making any reference to that and to the paper it may or may not use — and I say that with a smile to the Minister.
Regarding the central point about the success of disposable paper bags in the South, as I indicated in my first answer, we are working with the retail industry and anticipate bringing forward an aspect of that after various meetings over the summer. I plan to announce this in a number of weeks. Views are split on whether or not we can tax plastic bags, as happens in the South. The best legal advice at present is that we cannot say that we cannot do it. However, even if we can, there is a certain gestation period, and it could not be done in the life of this Assembly. In the autumn I plan to do something with plastic bags in conjunction with retailers and others. The community has wakened up to waste — we have to build on that and deliver something.

Ring of Gullion

6. asked the Minister of the Environment what progress has been made in implementing the recommendations made in the designation guide booklet for the Ring of Gullion area of outstanding natural beauty.
(AQO 58/02)


The implementation of the recommendations in the guide to designation falls to several public bodies and community groups, including my Department. Progress has been greatly helped by the appointment of a liaison officer funded by the Environment and Heritage Service in my Department, Newry and Mourne District Council and the Regeneration of South Armagh Trust. Among the steps taken are the establishment of a Ring of Gullion waymarked trail and the development of interpretative panels and published guides on historic and traditional buildings in the area. Several improvements to the agricultural landscape have also been achieved through the environmentally sensitive area scheme, administered by the Department of Agriculture and Rural Development.


I thank the Minister for the work done by his Department and other agencies over recent years to promote a very beautiful part of Northern Ireland — south Armagh.
Will the Minister specifically address the issues raised about military installations in relation to part of the designation guide, because one of the policy objectives is to diminish the impact of the military installations on public enjoyment of the rural amenities in south Armagh and the Ring of Gullion?
I ask him to redouble his efforts to ensure that that impact is eradicated completely.


I shall be brief in my answer to this question. I want to see the day come rapidly when the military installations to which Mr Fee refers are not here — namely, when we have peace, stability and a normal society in Northern Ireland.


Having had an interest in areas of outstanding natural beauty both as a councillor and as a Minister, I would like to know what progress has been made in considering the need to designate national parks in Northern Ireland?


That has been pressed upon me by various quarters. I am conscious that two national parks have been created recently in Scotland and that there are national parks in the South of Ireland, England and Wales. I have commissioned Europac, an independent agency, to advance principles by which we consider national parks in Northern Ireland. It will report to me within the next few days, and I will make a statement on the way forward before the end of the month. However, I remind Mr Foster and others that anything we wish to do needs money, and money requires commitment. National parks could make a significant contribution to tourism and to Northern Ireland’s economy. Therefore, we should find some money for that if we discover that that is the way forward.

Consultation Process

8. asked the Minister of the Environment to outline the consultation process his Department engaged in with the Construction Employers Federation before imposing a moratorium on planning permissions.
(AQO 5/02)


I have already stated that a moratorium has not been imposed on planning permissions. As a precautionary measure, decisions on planning applications in several areas affected by concerns over the risks of water pollution from sewage treatment plants and sewerage networks have not been taken pending the outcome of discussions between my Department and the Department for Regional Development. Those discussions involve the consideration of complex legal, environmental and operational factors.
I am acutely aware of the concerns of the construction industry and others about the precautionary steps that my Department has taken in those areas where the risk of water pollution is significant. My officials have had regular contact with the Construction Employers Federation, both on specific applications and on the generality of the issue. I also met with senior representatives of the Construction Employers Federation to hear their concerns at first hand on 22 August 2002. I repeat the commitment that I gave them to seek a balanced and pragmatic solution with sustainable development as the guiding principle. The federation accepts that principle.

First minister and Deputy First Minister

Mr Speaker: I wish to inform Members that question 10 in the name of Mrs Courtney has been withdrawn and will receive a written answer.

World Summit

Mr Kieran McCarthy: 1. asked the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister to make a statement on the Executive response to the World Summit on Sustainable Development.
(AQO31/02)

Mr Ivan Davis: 12. asked the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister to give details of the First Minister’s recent visit to South Africa; and to make a statement.
(AQO17/02)

Rt Hon David Trimble: I went to South Africa to represent Northern Ireland as part of the United Kingdom delegation at the World Summit on Sustainable Development. The Deputy First Minister had intended to attend also but, sadly, was unable to do so because of his mother’s terminal illness. I am sure that the Assembly will join me in extending to him sincere sympathies on her death.
The summit drew up an important international programme for sustainable development. It agreed on actions for, among other things, sanitation; water supplies; the conservation of fish stocks and other natural resources; and the further development of renewable energy. The Executive had begun to tackle those and related issues before the summit. As Members know, sustainable development is a key cross-cutting theme that underpins the work and priorities set out in the Programme for Government. In the coming months, the Executive will consider the summit’s implications for us. We shall combine those findings with the outcome of our consultations on the Northern Ireland sustainable development strategy. The Executive have also recently published the Northern Ireland biodiversity strategy.
While I was at the summit, I took the opportunity to develop a sustainable homes project at a township called Ivory Park, near Johannesburg. I also looked at three community development projects near Cape Town. I met the Premier of the Western Cape Province and several of his ministerial colleagues to discuss those and related matters. I also met the Canadian Prime Minister, the Israeli Foreign Minister, the Vice-President of Colombia and a senior representative of the Movement for Democratic Change in Zimbabwe. I also met Cyril Ramaphosa, members of the South African Human Rights Commission and several other interesting personalities.

Mr Kieran McCarthy: On behalf of my party, I offer my sympathy to the Deputy First Minister Mark Durkan on the sad loss of his mother last week.
I hope that the First Minister’s trip to South Africa was inspirational and that, after meeting so many important people, he has brought home fresh ideas. Does he intend to introduce a statutory duty for sustainable development along the lines of that introduced for the National Assembly for Wales in the Government of Wales Act 1998? If not, what plans does he have? Does he envisage committing this Assembly to the principles of sustainable development by putting it at the heart of our decisions, programmes, policies and ways of working?

Rt Hon David Trimble: I am sorry to say that I am not familiar with the Welsh legislation, but we shall consider it and the Member’s proposal.
We shall also consider the implications of the UN summit. We face challenges in several areas, particularly with regard to renewable energy. The agreements reached in Johannesburg on water and related matters are very important for the Third World. They put in place standards that do not exceed those that apply to us under European Directives. As the Member knows, we have much work to do to ensure that the water supply and water services in Northern Ireland meet the standards set by the European Directives, which are higher than the UN-sponsored standards set in Johannesburg. We shall consider the ongoing strategies and responses to consultation papers to establish whether we should take more general action in response to need.

Mr Ivan Davis: Can the First Minister comment on development being the main means by which poverty will be tackled in developing countries?

Rt Hon David Trimble: I was particularly struck by the position in some of the townships around Johannesburg and Cape Town. Of course, while one wants development to be sustainable, the key need in the Third World is for actual development. To achieve effective development, there must be a clear opportunity for people to participate in the economy and, indeed, a stable legal order for that to happen. We are conscious of huge opportunities in development. Although we have no direct responsibility for that and it is not something that we can directly assist, Members will want to see the ideas from the UN summit being carried forward.

Mr Roger Hutchinson: Bearing in mind that the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister has no direct responsibility in such matters, was this the best use of your Department’s resources — especially when there is such public concern about the number of people it takes to run your Department and the cost involved?

Rt Hon David Trimble: The Member misses the point. We were invited to join the UK delegation, along with representatives from the devolved Administrations in Wales and Scotland, simply because whatever came out of the Johannesburg summit would have to be implemented by those responsible for economic and environmental matters. In so far as that would affect England, the UK Government would be responsible: for Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland the devolved Administrations would be responsible.
The UK Government took the view that it was important to include the devolved Administrations as a way of demonstrating their commitment to implement whatever comes from the summit. Regarding economic and environmental matters, being at the summit gave us the opportunity to indicate our commitment to see that standards set out in the UN summit, and, indeed, European Directives, are achieved. That is important, and attending the summit was very valuable for this Administration.

Countering Sectarianism

Mr David Ford: 2. asked the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister to make a statement on action being taken by the Executive to counter sectarianism.
(AQO30/02)

Interface Violence

Mr Fred Cobain: 8. asked the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister to make a statement on the recent interface violence within Northern Ireland.
(AQO13/02)

Mr Mark Durkan: With permission, I will take questions 2 and 8 together. We deplore interface violence and all manifestations of sectarianism. Such antisocial behaviour is harmful not only to the well-being of local communities but to Northern Ireland as a whole. It destroys the local environment; ruins businesses and employment prospects; drives away new investment; and presents an unattractive picture to the world. We must all support the police in any good efforts to maintain law and order as well as stepping up our own efforts to deal with the underlying causes of sectarianism.
The Executive have committed themselves, in the Programme for Government, to putting a cross-departmental strategy and framework in place for promoting community relations and to ensure that there is an effective and co-ordinated approach to sectarian intimidation. A consultation paper is at an advanced stage of drafting, and it is anticipated that it will be submitted to the Executive for consideration in the near future. Following Executive approval, the consultation paper will be published. Respondents will have two months to communicate their views.
We intend to ensure that consultation is as broad as possible. For that reason we intend to convene meetings of political parties and social partners, including the churches and community organisations. The specific actions that should be taken to improve community relations will be discussed at those meetings.
The Executive stand ready to support any local initiative aimed at assisting local communities to resolve their differences peacefully. Our office has provided support through the Community Relations Council for a considerable number of groups and projects aimed at improving community relations.

Mr David Ford: I thank the Minister for his reply: unfortunately, coming when it does, it is not terribly credible. On 11 December 2001 I was told that a consultative document on community relations would be issued to interested bodies in April 2002. In April I was told it was imminent. I have just been told, yet again, that it is imminent. When are they actually going to do something about producing this document as opposed to talking about it?
In the meantime, the Executive have collectively failed to take any action on illegal flags and graffiti, action that was supported unanimously in the Assembly. The excuse for doing nothing about those issues was that they were being dealt with as part of the community relations review, which has run completely into the sand. Since then, we have all the difficulties that arose during the summer, followed by Ministers making separate personal visits to either side of the peace line.

Mr Speaker: I must ask the Member to come to the question.

Mr David Ford: When are they going to do something collectively?

Mr Mark Durkan: As I indicated in my answer, we hope that the draft consultation paper will go to the Executive shortly. It will then be issued for consultation. However, we do not want to rely on merely going through the standard consultation mechanisms, given the seriousness of the issue. Thus, the First Minister and I have decided that we will convene meetings of the political parties and of the social partners to discuss all the implications. We are trying to focus on this in ways that are helpful and that will involve as many people of different perspectives as possible. The issue will not simply be in any one Department’s control, and it will certainly not be controlled by the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister.
We have responded in different ways to problems in several areas. We have worked with other Departments to try to ensure that the devolved Administration is able to respond constructively where it can to some of the issues and difficulties that arise. That work is ongoing.
Mr Ford made an inference about people making separate visits to different sides of the peace line. I had planned to be in east Belfast last Wednesday, on both sides of the peace line, but my mother’s death meant that those plans had to change.

Mr Fred Cobain: Does the Deputy First Minister agree with the statement by the Assistant Chief Constable for Belfast, Alan McQuillan, linking mainstream paramilitaries with the orchestration of interface violence? Can he confirm the current status of the road realignment project promised to the people of Glenbryn?

Mr Mark Durkan: The Assistant Chief Constable gave an assessment of the involvement of paramilitary organisations in the violence. We all have reason to believe that different paramilitary organisations have been active in different ways and at different levels in much of the violence that we have seen. I am in no doubt that, in many instances, Loyalist paramilitaries are the sole aggressor; in other instances, they are the primary aggressor. In other instances and areas there are Loyalist and Republicans involved actively in fermenting and continuing the violence. We want all paramilitaries to desist from orchestrating violence or responding in a violent way.
The Member asked about what he referred to as the road realignment project. Members may be aware that the First Minister and I appointed arbitrators to look at how best to deal with the outstanding issues in relation to community safety matters and community dialogue. Those were the two main issues that we still had to address and make progress on, based on the letter that the First Minister and I issued last November.
There was not sufficient consensus or acceptance of any of the proposals that the First Minister and I had been working on. We referred it to arbitrators, and they have made their report. We received and accepted recommendations. They have been the subject of further feedback, and we now have a further report from the arbitrators. The Member will be aware that there does not seem to be any wider or more enthusiastic acceptance of the arbitrators’ recommendations from the community interests than for any of the previous proposals that the First Minister and I worked on.

Mr Alban Maginness: My point arises out of Mr Ford’s question about a counter-sectarianism strategy. Does the Deputy First Minister not agree that there is a duty on us all — the political parties and civil society — and not just on the Executive or on the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister to counteract sectarianism, in whatever form?
I come from north Belfast and represent North Belfast, and we have seen the worst examples of sectarianism. On Saturday night and Sunday night there were further attacks in the Skegoneill area, so I have some knowledge of the situation. Does the Deputy First Minister agree that the only way to tackle sectarianism is to mobilise society, including the political parties?

Mr Mark Durkan: I agree with the Member, and that is why the First Minister and I decided to convene meetings with the political parties as well as meetings with social partners. This needs community-wide mobilisation. It is not enough simply to deplore sectarian violence where it happens: we must confront, challenge and eradicate sectarianism from society. It is not enough for us to be working in shared institutions: we must ensure that we build a truly shared society. We must ensure that people in all walks of life in all parts of this city, and elsewhere, can live in safety and harmony with their neighbours. That is a huge challenge for us all. We can all be good at pointing out sectarianism in others. Let us confront prejudice in all its forms. That will be a significant challenge for us all — not just for the political parties.

Mr Barry McElduff: Go raibh maith agat, a Cheann Comhairle. I offer my sympathy, and that of my party, to the Deputy First Minister on the passing of his mother, comhbhrón ónár gcroí.
Will the Deputy First Minister comment on the recent initiative taken by the Belfast Lord Mayor, Alex Maskey, as part of his contribution towards the campaign to counter sectarianism?

Mr Mark Durkan: I thank Mr McElduff and take this opportunity to thank all Members who have expressed condolences to me and other family members on the death of my mother. That thanks extends to staff and officials in the Assembly and to journalists.
I attended the anti-sectarianism rally convened by the Lord Mayor of Belfast and Belfast City Council. I said then, and have said since, that it was a commendable initiative. In the past such measures have been led by the trade union movement, and it continues to be positively and proactively involved. It was right and proper for the council and the Lord Mayor to step forward as they did. I hope that their work for good relations bears fruit, and I hope that that happens in all council chambers. Sectarianism and sectarian attacks have not been confined to Belfast. Although sectarianism has a profile and concentration in the Belfast area, sectarianism has reigned havoc in the lives of innocent people in Larne, Coleraine and elsewhere.

Mr Robert McCartney: I join other Members in extending my sympathy, and that of my party, to the Deputy First Minister on the death of this mother.
In addressing the issue of sectarianism, and the steps needed to combat it, the Deputy First Minister talked about community involvement. But are not the essential community leaders the leaders of the political parties and elected representatives in the Assembly? The deputy chief constable and other members of the security forces acknowledge that paramilitaries are behind the increasing escalation of violence and confrontation in Belfast and other areas and that those paramilitaries are fronted by political parties in the Assembly among others. Bearing that in mind, is it not time that the Executive and the Assembly brought collective and political pressure to bear on those parties representing the organisations that are fermenting and escalating the violence that we wish to combat?

Mr Mark Durkan: In previous answers I expressed my belief that all political parties share a real responsibility to challenge sectarianism and ongoing paramilitary violence. We must be universal, and as unequivocal as possible, in our condemnation of all paramilitary activity. In the past, unfortunately, there has been an element of "whataboutery", whereby people have tried to excuse or explain one form of paramilitary activity on the back of other forms of it. We must move beyond that, because the whole community wants to know that those who call themselves democrats repudiate paramilitarism in any form and see no justification for it. In a united way, we must make it clear to paramilitaries that they have no right to attack anyone in this society, nor any right to purport to defend anyone.

Discussions with Prime Minister or Taoiseach

Dr Esmond Birnie: 3. asked the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister to detail any recent discussions with (a) the Prime Minister or (b) the Taoiseach.
(AQO14/02)

Rt Hon David Trimble: The last joint meeting that the Deputy First Minister and I had with the Prime Minister and with the Taoiseach was at the British-Irish Council meeting in Jersey on 14 June. In addition to the joint meeting there have been several individual meetings.

Dr Esmond Birnie: During any such meetings, did the subject of the implications of the 11 September atrocity arise and hence, by implication, what best Northern Ireland can do to play its part in combating international terrorism?

Rt Hon David Trimble: We approach the first anniversary of the terrible atrocity of 11 September, which crystallised for everyone the tremendous threat that international terrorism has posed for the world. In our own way, I am sure that we are committed to opposing the continuance of terrorism in any form. All the parties that endorsed the agreement affirmed, in its initial paragraphs, their absolute commitment to "peaceful means" and their opposition to the
"use or threat of force … whether in regard to this agreement or otherwise."
The phrase "or otherwise" is not qualified. If a party here or an organisation in Northern Ireland has been involved in assisting terrorist organisations elsewhere, as has the Republican movement, it is in breach of its undertakings in the agreement. One would want to know whether all such actions in support of terrorism outside Northern Ireland have ceased and whether the party in question has maintained its connections with ETA and the now illegal Herri Batasuna party. It would, of course, be contrary to the agreement for that party to maintain those connections.

Mr Patrick Roche: Does the First Minister agree that, in the context of Northern Ireland, the only way to deal authentically with the involvement of terrorists is to make sure that the representatives and leaders of an organisation such as the IRA, which is now operating at the heart of international terrorism, do not continue to participate in the Government of Northern Ireland. Mr Trimble’s responsibility is, if needs be, to end that involvement by collapsing the Executive.

Rt Hon David Trimble: It is open to Mr Roche, if he finds it uncomfortable in the Chamber, to leave it.

Maze Site

Mr Edwin Poots: 4. asked the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister what discussions have taken place with the Ministry of Defence regarding the removal of contaminated materials from the Maze site.
(AQO35/02)

Mr Mark Durkan: We understand that diesel contamination was found at the Ministry of Defence site at Long Kesh, adjacent to Maze Prison. Remedial work has now been completed, and levels are below those prescribed. A six-month monitoring has recently begun to ensure that the levels remain within the required limits.
The Northern Ireland Office is not aware of any contamination on the Maze prison site.

Mr Edwin Poots: I thank the Deputy First Minister for his response. Will he further ascertain whether other contamination has taken place? I have heard allegations that toxic materials were disposed of at the Maze site during the 1970s. I have also been informed that asbestos may have been dumped there. It would be difficult to develop the site unless some form of decontamination took place. I ask that it be fully investigated to ascertain whether there are any materials that might be dangerous to the public if the site were developed.

Mr Mark Durkan: I am not aware of the contamination that the Member has referred to or has heard allegations of, but since he has brought the matter to the OFMDFM’s attention, it will be pursued to enable us to be fully aware of what material is on the site and what the condition of the site is.

Mr Alex Attwood: The Deputy First Minister appreciates that one of Belfast’s great natural assets is its hills — Castlereagh, Cavehill, Black Mountain and Divis Mountain. Mindful that the Black Mountain has been ravaged by quarrying — more for private profit than to meet public need — has the Deputy First Minister raised the issue of the Ministry of Defence’s disposal of land at Divis Mountain? What steps can be taken to ensure that public access to that land continues and develops?

Mr Speaker: If the Minister can see a connection with the question he is a better man than I am — but then he is a better man than I am.

Mr Mark Durkan: The connection, I assume, is the disposal of Ministry of Defence land. The Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister is aware of the community’s strong interest in the future use of the land at Divis Mountain, and it knows that there have been discussions involving the Ministry of Defence, the National Trust and the Heritage Lottery Fund. We support the objective of making land at Divis Mountain accessible in the future. The Department of the Environment has been keeping in touch with those issues. The land was not included in the reinvestment and reform initiative on the basis that the Ministry of Defence believed that the future of the land had been settled through negotiations with the National Trust.

Funding of Women’s Groups

Prof Monica McWilliams: 5. asked the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister to make a statement on its current and proposed policy regarding the funding of women’s groups.
(AQO22/02)

Rt Hon David Trimble: Women’s groups are an integral part of the community and voluntary sector. A recent position paper on the funding of women’s organisations concluded that there was a need to identify an interim measure to support the work of women’s organisations. An interdepartmental working group, jointly chaired by the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister and the Department for Social Development, commissioned and considered research by the women’s support network on potential and actual job and service losses, and it also explored options to secure funding for this measure.
The working group concluded that the most effective way forward was to make an Executive programme fund bid for a share of the £6 million announced in July by the Executive. The purpose of the bid is to maintain important voluntary community sector services that are facing short-term financial difficulties. The Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister and the Department for Social Development have worked together on behalf of the working group to produce a cross-departmental bid to sustain many services, including those delivered by women’s organisations. That bid is supported by several other Departments.

Prof Monica McWilliams: On behalf of the Women’s Coalition, I extend my condolences to the Deputy First Minister on the death of his mother.
I am slightly reassured by the First Minister’s answer, but nonetheless I am concerned about the delay and the length of time it has taken. Will the First Minister confirm how many meetings have taken place about this urgent issue? Last week, Members may have received, as I did, faxes from a women’s centre explaining that it had received a large capital grant to build a brand new building, which opened recently, only to discover last Friday that it was closing its doors. An urgent meeting of the management had been called to tell everyone that they were shutting up shop. Windsor Women’s Centre in the Village area, the Shankill women’s centre and many others are having the same crisis. We can no longer wait for decisions that take such a long time. When will the money be delivered at ground level? All of the centres could be faced with closure.

Rt Hon David Trimble: The bid to the Executive programme funds for a share of the £6 million will come before the Executive later this month, so something may develop from that. I understand the general point that the Member makes because of the reduction in the amount —

Mr Speaker: I must interrupt the First Minister because the time for questions to the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister is up. Perhaps the First Minister will give the balance of his answer to the Member in writing.

Regional Development

Mr Speaker: I wish to inform the House that question 17, standing in the name of Mrs Annie Courtney, has been withdrawn and will receive a written answer.

Car Theft

Dr Esmond Birnie: 1. asked the Minister for Regional Development what discussions he has had with PSNI regarding the incidence of car theft from on-street car parking in Belfast.
(AQO19/02)

Mr Peter Robinson: Car theft from on-street car parking is a law and order issue and, as such, my Department has not been advised or approached by the Police Service. It may be of little interest to the Member, but a record is kept of the incidences of car theft from off-street car parks in the eastern division. Those records show that three cars have been stolen in the past six months.

Dr Esmond Birnie: I have been informed by other sources that many cars stolen in the Belfast city area are from unattended on-street car parking areas and are principally left by commuters during office hours. What is the Minister doing, or what does he intend to do, to promote public transport and/or move towards residents car parking schemes to reduce the number of cars parked on-street, which are particularly vulnerable to theft?
(Mr Deputy Speaker [Mr McClelland] in the Chair)

Mr Peter Robinson: As I said, I have no ministerial responsibility in that area. However, the hon Member will be interested to know that I voted against the organisational changes in the Police Service that have left it with a shortfall in finance, manpower and organisation.

Mr Maurice Morrow: Dr Birnie touched on the subject of my supplementary question. What plans does the Minister have to introduce residents parking schemes in Northern Ireland?

Mr Peter Robinson: The Department for Regional Development has the statutory power under the Road Traffic Regulation (Northern Ireland) Order 1997 to introduce residents parking schemes. While the Department has identified some pilot residents parking schemes to test the necessary administrative enforcement procedures, the Assembly will be aware and will appreciate that those schemes will benefit local residents only if they are effectively enforced. In Northern Ireland, unlike the rest of the UK, that is solely a matter for the police or, in some cases, traffic wardens.
Regrettably, during discussions on the issue, the police have stated that they would be unable to undertake the necessary enforcement work in relation to such schemes. It, therefore, seems unlikely that the Roads Service will be able to progress the matter in the short term, and enforcement of residents parking schemes may have to await primary legislation for the decriminalisation of parking enforcement.

Sewerage Infrastructure

Mr Edwin Poots: 2. asked the Minister for Regional Development to detail any forward plans for capital development of the sewerage infrastructure in the Lagan Valley constituency for each of the next four years.
(AQO36/02)

Mr Peter Robinson: Over the next four years, the Water Service proposes to invest £8 million on upgrading the sewerage infrastructure in the Lagan Valley constituency. That comprises £1·7 million in 2002-03, £3million in 2003-04, £1·7 million in 2004-05 and a further £1·6 million in 2005-06. The upgrading work includes the construction of 10 new wastewater treatment works at locations including Aghalee, Dromore, Glenavy and Annahilt. In the longer term, the Water Service proposes to refurbish sewerage networks across the constituency at a cost of £12 million. In view of available funding and other priorities, it is likely to be 2007 before the work can commence.

Mr Edwin Poots: The basis for my question was the announcement by the Minister of the Environment of a moratorium on development that has not received outline permission. Will the Minister for Regional Development assure us that the matter will be addressed, and that urgently needed development will not be hindered as a result of the Minister of the Environment’s statement on the Environment and Heritage Service?

Mr Peter Robinson: The Minister of the Environment and I met to discuss issues relating to the Environment and Heritage Service, the Water Service and the assessed hot-spot areas. I plan to meet Mr Nesbitt again this Wednesday further to our having jointly tasked our officials to examine the issues involved and to propose appropriate action.
Northern Ireland’s infrastructure has been seriously underfunded for many years, and there is a significant backlog in the provision of water and sewerage services. Consequently, we must spend about £3 billion in the next 20 years. That means that an additional £50 million a year beyond the present expenditure estimates will be required. Therefore, it will take a long time and considerable expenditure to solve all the problems.
Programmes have already been scheduled to deal with the hot spots in the Member’s constituency of Lagan Valley. Given that there is a programme to deal with issues of concern, it is not unreasonable for the planners to allow development to proceed.

Mr Ivan Davis: I welcome the Minister’s answer. Is he satisfied that the problem that I raised about sewerage provision in the Glenmore area of Hilden has been resolved?

Mr Peter Robinson: As I recall, that was an odour problem. The Water Service commissioned a survey, the publication of which is imminent. As soon as the results become available, I will let Mr Davis know the outcome and what action my Department will take.

Mr Seamus Close: I thank the Minister for his replies, particularly those concerning forward plans and the areas marked for investment. Did the Minister mention the Fort Road area of the Lagan Valley constituency, where pipes leak constantly and there is no main sewer? If that area is not on the list, will the Minister examine the matter and reply in writing, if necessary?

Mr Peter Robinson: I am not familiar with the geography of that area, and to tell me that there are leaking pipes there does not help to define the case, because there are so many leaking pipes in Northern Ireland. I will ask my Department for the details of that site, and I will contact Mr Close about it.

Water and Sewerage Systems

Ms Patricia Lewsley: 3. asked the Minister for Regional Development when he will bring forward proposals to the Executive and the Assembly to address the problems in the water and sewerage systems.
(AQO47/02)

Mr Peter Robinson: The Water Service must invest an additional £500 million over the next 10 years to comply with European Directives on water quality, to respond to increasing demand and to upgrade ageing infrastructure.
I inherited a legacy of more than 30 years of underinvestment in water and sewerage services when I took up the regional development portfolio in November 1999. Since then, I have vigorously pursued all possible options to address that historic funding shortfall and to ensure the delivery of efficient and effective water and sewerage services to customers.
The Water Service’s total capital investment in the next 20 years amounts to approximately £3 billion. Currently, the Water Service is finalising a comprehensive review of the condition and investment requirements of all surface and underground water and sewerage infrastructure. That exercise takes account of the increasingly stringent European standards for water quality and wastewater treatment that the Water Service must meet.
The data are being used to prepare an asset management plan (NIAMP 2), which will define the level of capital investment required for the next 20 years, together with the associated operational requirements for the next 10 years and how and where that investment should be targeted. NIAMP 2 will be finalised towards the end of 2002. I will present the plan to the Assembly next year, when I will also present my options for funding the strategy. Those options will comprise a combination of continued public expenditure funding, the use of public-private partnerships, alternative funding proposals such as developer contributions and the investment potential offered under the reinvestment and reform initiative’s new borrowing powers. I await with interest the outcome of the consultation on the review of rating policy and its consideration of the future funding options for the Water Service.

Ms Patricia Lewsley: I thank the Minister for his comprehensive answer. Considering Mr Poots’s question, there are many more questions that I would have liked to ask. How dependable is the time frame, and how quickly does the Minister hope to bring it before the Assembly?

Mr Peter Robinson: We are on schedule to meet the timetable that has been set out. The time restrictions that are of greatest concern are those that have been set down by the European Union. Under European regulations, Northern Ireland is in default of a number of Directives, and the majority of infraction proceedings against the United Kingdom from Europe relate to Northern Ireland. The outcome could be a massive imposition on the funding of the Northern Ireland block. It is reckoned that the United Kingdom could face fines amounting to tens of millions of pounds if the infractions are not dealt with.
I want the Water Service to spend its money on improving the quality of its network, not on paying fines, because I suspect that the Treasury would not bear the cost of any infraction proceedings and would be likely to pass it off by way of a penalty on the Northern Ireland block. Therefore, at the very time when we needed more money to deal with the causes of infractions, we would have to spend money on paying fines. We have already passed some of the deadlines without being able to remedy the causes.

Mrs Iris Robinson: The Minister has touched on some of the difficulties leading to hold-ups in planning permission. Is the Water Service responsible for the refusals?

Mr Peter Robinson: Ultimately, any development decision is a planning issue, and the decision will have to be taken by the Planning Service. In doing so, it will have to take into account the views of the agencies it consults with. Among those agencies are the Water Service and the Environment and Heritage Service. To the best of my knowledge, in the Member’s constituency of Strangford, the Water Service is not objecting to any development on the basis of incapacity in its sewerage network. However, there are serious issues. The House supports the Environment and Heritage Service, as we do not want substandard wastewater treatment, and we do not want effluent on our beaches and around the coast.
Clearly, it is a concern that must be dealt with. The pragmatic approach has to be whether the Water Service has proposals that will, in time, deal with the problem. If there is under-capacity in a wastewater treatment works, and there is a proposal to deal with that under-capacity, the sensible approach would be to allow development to take place providing it does not cause a great problem before improvement is made.
If that sensible approach is taken it will resolve the problem of an overwhelming number of hot spots. It is to be hoped that later this week the Minister of the Environment and I will be able to resolve some of the problems on the basis of a useful meeting that we have already had and the work that has been carried out with officials since then.

Prof Monica McWilliams: The Minister told the House that responsibility for the Water Service lies with him, and him alone. Would he, therefore, explain why he chose not to visit the lower Ormeau Road at the time of severe flooding — when people were traumatised after sewage came into their homes for the third time? Perhaps he would have seen for himself the urgency of fitting pumps that work. In that case there were modern pumps, but they completely failed. Would he assure the community of River Terrace that he will come out and talk to them?

Mr Peter Robinson: Members are aware that many properties across the Province were flooded. If the Minister were expected to call at every house that is flooded, he would not have the opportunity to remedy the situation. My Colleague, during his time in office, visited the Ormeau Road area. There is no reason to believe that, if time were available, I would not do the same.
As a constituency Member I have seen flooding in many circumstances. I understand the serious concerns that people have when flooding occurs and the upheaval that it causes. I want to resolve those problems. My time is best used doing that, rather than meeting people for public relations purposes. However, I am happy to meet people if the Member wants to bring them to me, or wants to make an arrangement with me. I have no aversion to visiting the Ormeau Road. I am happy to speak to people and to hear their concerns.

Light Rail Services

Mr Sean Neeson: 4. asked the Minister for Regional Development to make a statement on the development of light rail services in the Greater Belfast area.
(AQO48/02)

Mr Peter Robinson: The regional transportation strategy for Northern Ireland 2002-12 includes £100 million for the commencement of a rapid transit network for Belfast. The development of that network will be taken forward against the backdrop of the Belfast metropolitan transport plan, which is currently being prepared. I regard that initiative as extremely important. Over the next few weeks I will set up a dedicated project team to begin detailed preparatory work. Part of that work will examine a range of possible options for such a network, including light rail.

Mr Sean Neeson: I welcome the Minister’s answer. Although I appreciate that contracts have been signed for new train sets, I must point out to the Minister that extended and improved park-and-ride facilities on the Larne line have been successful. Bearing that in mind, would he agree that the real potential for improving public transport lies with the development of a light rail system in the Greater Belfast area?

Mr Peter Robinson: With regard to the Greater Belfast area, I believe that the prospects of getting people out of their cars would be vastly improved it there were a rapid transport system. The Member keeps talking about light rail. However, there are several options — guided buses; a tram system of hybrid vehicles that can go on rails and on the road at certain points, and light rail. I am not making up my mind on the options at this time. However, a dedicated project team will be set up to consider which route is appropriate for a pilot scheme — many people have assumed it will be the E-way — to establish the best vehicle for the scheme and, perhaps, leave open the option of upgrading if that seems to be appropriate.
It would clearly be in the interests of the overall project if, along the route of such a rapid transit scheme, there were appropriate park-and-ride facilities. That kind of modern and speedy transport system would be more likely to catch the imagination of people in the Greater Belfast area and, therefore, more likely to get them out of their cars and onto public transport. However, that only deals with the Greater Belfast area, and only part of it at that. We are considering other proposals, such as quality bus corridors, which would go along other routes to assist in encouraging public transport use by providing a more reliable and faster way into the city centre. Therefore, one should not rule out the prospect of more quality bus corridors. The regional transportation strategy draws attention to their potential.

Mr Ken Robinson: Will the Minister undertake to ensure that proper infrastructural links are in place to facilitate the use of any projected Belfast light railway by those living in the Greater Belfast travel-to-work area? I refer specifically to those who live in east Antrim, who must currently struggle with an inadequate road system, epitomised by the A2 between Newtownabbey and Carrickfergus, and antiquated rail provision, and where the opportunity for a quality bus service does not currently exist.

Mr Peter Robinson: The regional transportation strategy, even though it only goes up to 2012, showed that in the longer term, within the 25 years of the regional development strategy, there was the potential, not simply to have a rapid transit route, but to have a rapid transit network. One of the illustrative drawings in the regional transportation strategy showed an east-west route and a north-south route. If successful, there might even be an orbital route as well.
If there were east-west and north-south routes, having routes from the outlying areas to feed in to those networks would make good sense and ensure that the full potential was reached. The more customers for those kinds of routes, the better the service can be. The better the service, the more likely customers are to use it.

Mr Jim Shannon: Ards Borough Council and the Strangford constituency are interested in the light rail service. Is the Minister prepared to consider extending any rapid transit system to Comber and Newtownards?

Mr Peter Robinson: It is intended to run a pilot rapid transit system under the regional transportation strategy, from which we will learn much about the potential for that form of transport, whether it is tram or light rail, to attract the normal road user onto public transport. The more successful the pilot scheme, the greater the opportunity for extending it will be.
The Member’s question is along the same lines as that of the Member for East Antrim, Mr Ken Robinson. Even if the rapid transit corridor were not to be extended into Comber and Newtownards, those areas would be ideal for bringing vehicles onto it, if the corridor from Dundonald into Belfast was being used. Whether it would be buses or another form of public transport, it would bring those areas into the rapid transit network, and they would gain from the faster journey times into Belfast from that point.

Unadopted Roads

Mr Francie Molloy: 5. asked the Minister for Regional Development to detail the number of unadopted roads rejected by the Department in each of the last five years on the grounds that they had not been brought up to the required standard.
(AQO65/02)

Mr Peter Robinson: I take it that the Member’s question relates to long-standing unadopted roads rather than to roads in new housing developments. There are many such private roads and laneways across Northern Ireland that have not been adopted into the public road network. As they are private roads, the Roads Service does not have exact details, but it is estimated that there are about 62 km throughout Northern Ireland.
Over the years, there have been many requests for private roads to be adopted, although details are not tabulated. Unfortunately, very few of them are fit for adoption. To bring all private roads in Northern Ireland up to the necessary standard for adoption would cost approximately £14 million, excluding the cost of land, service alterations and accommodation works, which would substantially increase the sum.

Mr Francie Molloy: The infrastructure of long-standing roads has been neglected for many years in several district council areas. Does the Minister have any plans to bring some of those roads into the circle and improve their infrastructure for the benefit of residents?

Mr Peter Robinson: I am reluctant to get a reputation for girning about my inheritance in the Department for Regional Development. However, in addition to the problems with the Water Service, there were also problems with roads and transportation. The regional transportation strategy recognised that considerable work was necessary, which would involve a considerable sum of money. In order to meet the priorities that had been set out for the next 10 years, it was necessary to increase the public expenditure extrapolated over the 10-year period by about £1·3 billion or £1·4 billion. The Assembly would probably recognise that it is better to deal with those priorities, which were unanimously agreed on, before taking on more responsibilities. There would be a local advantage in having some of the unadopted roads adopted. To do so requires them to be brought up to standard. I understand that Dungannon and South Tyrone Borough Council in the Member’s constituency had considered the possibility of using ratepayers’ funds to make some impact in that area, although I suspect that the Minister of the Environment would not greatly encourage that. In the meantime, I can give no solace about unadopted roads. Our priority must be the programme that the Assembly agreed under the regional transportation strategy.

Mr Roy Beggs: Does the Minister acknowledge that some developers continue to be slow about bringing roads and sewerage systems up to departmental standards and that the Department needs to use increased vigour to force those developers to bring roads, footpaths and sewers up to standard so that the residents do not have to endure inferior utilities? Does he agree that the Department must also ensure that the bonds that are put up by developers are drawn down more readily so that the public are not inconvenienced?

Mr Peter Robinson: That is a fair point. When completion of roads to adoption standard by developers does not occur within a reasonable period from the date of the occupation of houses, the Private Streets (Northern Ireland) Order 1980, as amended, enables the Roads Service to complete the necessary work at the expense of developers. Such action is normally initiated only after efforts to persuade the developers to meet their obligations have proved unsuccessful, and each case is considered on its merits. My Department has no plan to introduce any further legislation, because it believes that the current legislation is appropriate. If developers have not carried out their responsibilities, the Department usually takes action approximately one year after the date of occupation. If the Member wishes, the Department can examine the appropriateness of that time period and consider whether it can be brought forward.

Belfast to Bangor Railway Line

Mr Alan McFarland: 6. asked the Minister for Regional Development what progress has been made in relaying the Belfast to Bangor railway line.
(AQO20/02)

Mr Peter Robinson: Translink has advised me that the relay work between Bangor and Belfast is complete and that full, scheduled services are now in operation.

Mr Alan McFarland: The Minister kindly wrote to me in August setting out details of the project management chaos and the additional costs associated with the relaying of the Bangor to Belfast line, which he has already spoken about in the House. What lessons have been learned from that? What are the implications for future line relaying, particularly the Whitehead line, and is such work likely to incur additional costs?

Mr Peter Robinson: Northern Ireland Railways outsourced the project management on that stretch of the line. Last November, it dispensed with the services of the project management team and took over the work itself. It has meant a considerable delay in the initial timescale, and the Member is right to draw attention to the indication that project costs will have been exceeded. I do not yet have a final figure for the cost of the work; it was originally in the region of £9·5 million. It was then determined, however, that a more enhanced scheme should be adopted, and that was estimated at £14·7 million.
The estimates are now rumoured to be considerably in excess of that figure. However, Northern Ireland Railways is considering the possibility of legal action arising from contractual issues, which, if successful, will significantly reduce the amount of the excess.

Mr Roger Hutchinson: Although I welcome the laying of new track throughout the Northern Ireland network and not only on the Bangor-Belfast line, can the Minister tell us when we shall have new trains?

Mr Donovan McClelland: Perhaps the Minister would be brief.

Mr Peter Robinson: We shall take possession of the first train in December 2003. That train will be used to commission further trains, and others will follow fairly shortly. I cannot say which line the first train will run on: that is an operational decision.

Mr Donovan McClelland: Unfortunately, time is up. I am sure that the Minister will give Mr Hutchinson a written answer.

The Environment

Mobile Telecommunications Masts

Mr John Kelly: 1. asked the Minister of the Environment to detail the number of planning applications for mobile telecommunications masts that were (a) submitted; (b) refused; (c) granted; and (d) withdrawn (i) in the six months prior to the introduction of new departmental guidelines, Planning Policy Statement 10 (PPS 10); and (ii) since the introduction of the new guidelines.
(AQO67/02)

Mr Dermot Nesbitt: A total of 271 full planning and prior approval applications was received in respect of telecommunication development in the six months prior to the introduction of the new guidelines, under Planning Policy Statement 10, from 11 April 2002. Of those, 37 were refused, 183 were granted and 51 were withdrawn. A total of 185 full planning and prior approval applications has been received since the introduction of the new guidelines. Of these, 18 were refused, 127 were granted and 20 were withdrawn. The remaining 20 applications remain under consideration.
The Planning (General Development) (Amendment) Order (Northern Ireland) 2002 came into operation on 21 June 2002. That legislation removes existing permitted development rights from telecommunications code system operators and requires full planning permission for new telecommunications development, including masts.

Mr John Kelly: I thank the Minister for his full reply. Given the public’s perception of the health implications of masts, as well as their unsightliness, will the guidelines curtail their installation throughout the North?

Mr Dermot Nesbitt: My aim is for sustainable development; namely, that Northern Ireland will have a modern telecommunication industry, which industry needs, and that we will protect the environment. With regard to perceptions about the effects of telecommunications masts on health, I remind Mr Kelly that it is his Minister, Minister de Brún, who gives me advice on that aspect. I act on that advice. I am not responsible for health matters, nor have I knowledge of them. I take guidance from others.

Mr Ivan Davis: Will the Minister explain what monitoring of emissions from mobile masts has been undertaken? What are the results?

Mr Dermot Nesbitt: The Stewart Report, published two years ago, advised that an independent, random audit should be carried out, especially on those masts situated in sensitive areas such as school premises. Last year, masts in the grounds of 100 schools were randomly tested, and the emissions recorded were many thousands of times below the levels recommended by health authorities. This year, tests are also being conducted on masts in the grounds of hospitals. I advise Members who want more information to visit www.radio.gov.uk.

Mr Jim Shannon: The Minister will agree that many people’s concerns about telecommunications masts have not decreased. Has the new legislation introduced by the Minister addressed those concerns?

Mr Dermot Nesbitt: Residents are mainly concerned with their health — one current application has generated 200 objections, all of which are based on possible health risks. Mr Shannon will recall that when he last spoke on the subject, his mobile phone rang in the Chamber. He will also know that a Colleague of his, Mr Wells, has told the Assembly that he owned a mobile phone and had used it to rescue someone when walking in the Mournes. We live in a society where mobile phones exist, and I must deal with residents’ concerns in a pragmatic and balanced manner.

Moratorium on Planning Approvals

Ms Jane Morrice: 2. asked the Minister of the Environment to outline (a) his position regarding the moratorium on planning approvals due to pressures on the sewerage infrastructure and (b) the specific areas affected in Northern Ireland.
(AQO121/02)

Planning Applications

Mr Mick Murphy: 3. asked the Minister of the Environment to detail, by district council area, the number of planning applications affected by the moratorium resulting from objections regarding the discharge of wastewater that does not meet EC standards for water quality; and to make a statement.
(AQO66/02)

Mr Dermot Nesbitt: There is no moratorium on planning approvals in Northern Ireland. The Department has a statutory duty to promote the conservation and cleanliness of water resources. It must also take account of the requirements of EU Directives that safeguard water quality.
In recent months, the Environment and Heritage Service (EHS) has highlighted concerns over the quality of discharges and risk of water pollution from sewage treatment plants and sewerage networks at several locations in Northern Ireland. This has raised complex legal, environmental and operational issues. While urgent discussions are held between my Department and the Department for Regional Development, which is responsible for wastewater treatment, decisions on planning applications in the affected areas are on hold as a precautionary measure.
Planning Service and EHS are consulting on 588 planning applications in Northern Ireland, a breakdown of which by Planning Service division is: Downpatrick 257; Ballymena 166; Omagh 95; Belfast 52; Londonderry 9; Enniskillen 4; Coleraine 3; and Craigavon 2. I will write to Ms Morrice when a breakdown by district council area is available. That information will also be placed in the Assembly Library. Planning applications that do not require connection to the sewerage network, such as extensions to houses or garages, continue to be processed to conclusion by the Planning Service.
I am acutely aware of the concerns that the development industry and public representatives have about this precautionary step. I announced recently that the Planning Service would now process to decision stage those development proposals that have received outline planning approval but are being held back as a precaution. I met the Minister for Regional Development, and we tasked our officials to formulate recommendations to resolve the difficulties by mid-September. Those recommendations will specify locations where the sewage pollution problems dictate that particular attention must be paid to water quality issues when planning decisions are being made.
I am determined to achieve an early, balanced and pragmatic resolution that will meet Northern Ireland’s development needs while simultaneously protecting the environment, and I plan to make an early statement to the Assembly to that effect.

Ms Jane Morrice: I listened with interest to the Minister’s response. It seems that there is a lot of confusion. We appreciate that a resolution is necessary because more and more untreated sewage is flowing into places such as Belfast Lough and, particularly, Ballyholme Bay, and that is disgraceful. I should like confirmation from the Minister that planning approvals have not been blocked anywhere in north Down. I did not hear any specific reference to north Down in his list. I want clarification on that, because the sewerage system cannot be overloaded in places such as Briggs Rock.
I also want to know exactly what discussions are taking place with the Minister for Regional Development, because it seems from a reply that Mr P Robinson gave that the failings of the sewerage systems mean that planning applications are not proceeding is not equally appreciated in both Departments.

Mr Dermot Nesbitt: I am sorry that Ms Morrice is confused, although this is not the first time that she has been confused when she has spoken in the Assembly. The Planning Service in Northern Ireland is split into divisions. I told her that there are 257 planning applications in Downpatrick. We learnt in a debate in May that the treatment works in the Downpatrick division are all right again or will be, so I am clear about what I have said. I have also suggested that the breakdown by district council area, which I hope will help Ms Morrice, will be available in the Library and will be sent to her.
Ms Morrice’s second point was that the Minister for Regional Development said something different to what I did. I know what he said, and I welcome it. He made it clear at the outset that there has been a difficulty with sewage since direct rule. He talked about £3 billion being needed over the next 20 years, which is £50 million a year. He also said that he wants to support the Environment and Heritage Service. He said that he and I had had a very good meeting, and Hansard will show that. Let us not have people trying to pull the Minister for Regional Development and me apart: we and our officials are working together to try to resolve a problem, and the Assembly is about working together to provide solutions for the people of Northern Ireland.
Let me emphasise this: I concur with the Minister for Regional Development that there is a problem with sewage treatment works in Northern Ireland — only 57 % of them are up to national standard. In Great Britain, 95 % are up to national standard. However, from the EC Urban Waste Water Treatment Directive, it appears that only 35 % of sewage treatment works are up to standard, so there is a problem: money is needed, and we are trying to approach that difficulty pragmatically and realistically.

Mr Donovan McClelland: Before I call the next Member, I wish to remind the House of the importance of brevity in questions and answers.

Mr Mick Murphy: The Minister is probably aware that Members are being strongly lobbied on this. I understood that a previous moratorium had been lifted, but the Minister has told the House that a precautionary measure has been implemented. Is the Minister aware that many jobs are at stake while that precautionary measure exists?
I brought the matter to the Minister’s attention before when Newcastle lost its blue flag status over the sewage works. What has been done as a precaution to get that status reinstated in Newcastle?

Mr Dermot Nesbitt: I am glad that the word "moratorium" has been mentioned again. The precise wording that went to the divisional planning offices was as follows:
"no applications are taken to Council with opinions to refuse on the basis of waste management unit (WMU) advice for the present."
We were trying to facilitate development. If we had acted upon the Environment and Heritage Service’s recommendation, refusals would have been made to the council. Our advice was to wait until a further, detailed examination had been carried out. When a planning application is made, further detail is often sought before a decision is made. Therefore, a moratorium has not been imposed; rather a waste management precaution has been introduced. There is no problem with extensions to houses.
I am conscious of the jobs aspect and have met the Construction Employers Federation and, for example, Derry City Council to explain the situation. Those bodies appreciate the problem and our efforts to resolve the difficulty of inadequate infrastructure while protecting the environment. There are strong needs, and we want to provide solutions.

Mr Jim Wilson: The Minister is aware of my concern about the matter. His attention was first drawn to it when I highlighted the serious situation in Ballyclare, in my constituency, where identifiable household bathroom waste had been entering the Sixmilewater River for years because the local sewage treatment works was working at 60% overload. When I first brought a deputation to the Minister, he was shocked by the news.
Will the Minister take into account the Department for Regional Development’s future capital build programme? A balance should be achieved between the need for environmental protection and the need for development. More importantly, will the Minister inform district councils, when they are being consulted by the Planning Service, if the Environment and Heritage Service and the Department for Regional Development have advised that infrastructure — principally, sewage treatment, but also roads — would not support development? It is at that stage that the public can express its views about local circumstances.

Mr Dermot Nesbitt: Mr Wilson did bring the Ballyclare case to my attention. The Department must strike a pragmatic balance between dealing with developers’ concerns and preventing pollution.
The Department of the Environment will take into account the Department for Regional Development’s future capital build programme, identifying how much capital there is, the level of pollution that might result from development, and for how long development should be held back, taking into account when capital will be available. The Department must marry the capital throughput to the Department for Regional Development with the position as regards infrastructure and the need for more capital.
The second part of Mr Wilson’s questions concerned infastructure not supporting development and informing district councils. I have no problem signing up to that. This is open Government, and I want the problems to be known. Only when district councils and residents know the problems will we be able to address the solutions and progress together.

Contracts

Mr Alex Attwood: 4. asked the Minister of the Environment to outline (a) how many contracts, to what value, and in what departmental areas, have been forwarded to the public procurement board for consideration and inclusion in the pilot studies for procurement policy; (b) what measures are being undertaken to assess each departmental contract for inclusion in the pilot studies; and to make a statement.
(AQO59/02)

Mr Dermot Nesbitt: Further to the procurement board’s decision on 3 July 2002 to undertake a pilot study on the use of public procurement contracts to help the unemployed back to work, my Department examined all contracts to be advertised over the next six to nine months. A service contract in the Environment and Heritage Service has been identified as meeting the criteria set out in the pilot study by the procurement board.
The contract is for the recruitment of tour guides to work at various locations throughout Northern Ireland. It is valued at £300,000 and involves the recruitment of permanent and temporary staff. The start date for the contract is expected to be November this year. The relevant details will be passed to the public procurement board later this week.

Mr Alex Attwood: I acknowledge that the Department of the Environment is one of only four Departments that have forwarded possible contracts to the public procurement board. The Minister’s answer is helpful, but it is hardly reassuring that, despite the efforts of his Department, only one contract at a total value of £300,000 has been identified as suitable for inclusion in the pilot scheme. Given that 20 such schemes are proposed under the policy, is the Minister satisfied that there are not other areas in the Department of the Environment where contracts of greater worth might be identified for inclusion in the scheme?

Mr Dermot Nesbitt: I thank Mr Attwood for recognising that the Department of the Environment is one of only four Departments to submit projects. However, I remind him that there is a financial limitation on contracts. In the construction industry the contracts must be worth between £1 million and £3·86 million, and for projects in the service industry the contracts must be worth between £250,000 and £500,000. That is not an inconsequential amount of money, particularly given that the Department of the Environment is primarily a regulatory body and that, as such, its expenditure is dominated by staff costs and support to counsel. I also remind Mr Attwood that the Department of the Environment’s budget amounts to about £118 million a year. Given the magnitude of those figures and that my Department is one of the four Departments to respond, Mr Attwood should say " Well done" and stop at that.

Wake Up To Waste Campaign

Ms Patricia Lewsley: 5. asked the Minister of the Environment to give an update on the Wake Up to Waste campaign.
(AQO46/02)

Mr Dermot Nesbitt: Phase 1 of the Wake up to Waste campaign generated an excellent response. Several district councils and contractors reported increases of up to 30% in recyclable materials collected. People want to participate and to have the opportunity to take action to enhance their environment. I am pleased with the approach.
Phase 2 of the campaign starts in October. It will provide guidance on the practical steps members of the public can take in their everyday activities to reduce waste. It will focus on the things that we can all do to reduce, reuse and recycle, such as reusing plastic carrier bags. We are establishing a retail partnership to communicate that message to consumers and to promote sustainable waste management practices.
During the summer the Environment and Heritage Service also completed a pilot education programme, which was delivered to two schools in each of the 26 council areas.

Ms Patricia Lewsley: I welcome phase 2 of the campaign, as I know that phase 1 was successful. Some £500,000 was invested in phase 1. How much will be invested in the second phase? Given the amount of paper that many Members are gathering, will the Minister’s Department take the lead in using recycled paper?

Mr Dermot Nesbitt: I like the second part of the question — we lead by example. A total of £1·5 million over three years has been committed to the public awareness aspect of the campaign. One would think therefore that £500,000 is available to be spent each year. However, I am very conscious that the public must be made aware of the problem. Ten per cent of households in Northern Ireland responded to the questionnaire. Those who responded clearly want to play their part, and we must therefore provide a solution for them.
We will continue to educate the people of Northern Ireland further on that.
Regarding recyclable paper and public procurement in general, I agree that this Administration should lead by example in a whole raft of ways. It is difficult for us in the Administration to ask others to do things that we are not prepared to do. I sympathise and empathise with the second part of the question.

Mr Tom Hamilton: Will the Minister give assurances that his Department will ensure that community-based initiatives, as opposed to just individual ones, will play a major part in this programme?

Mr Dermot Nesbitt: Individuals make up the community, and the community is very important. Commencing in October, and building on what we did last year, we will have regular meetings with the regional communication co-ordinators and the local authority recycling officers, who are the people with links to the community. We will continue to work with the community, and we plan to produce a community guide to waste management, aimed at community groups, which will contain practical information on how to reduce, reuse and recycle.

Ms Mary Nelis: Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. I am delighted to hear the Minister being so enthusiastic about the issue of waste paper. You need look no further than the Assembly to see the amount of waste paper going through our offices. In phase 2 will the Minister address the issue of introducing disposable paper bags and doing away with the plastic bags that clutter our environment and cost so much money to clear — a scheme which has been introduced successfully in the South of Ireland?

Mr Dermot Nesbitt: I am tempted, but I will not say anything about the waste paper caused by the number of languages we use. The Minister of Health, Social Services and Public Safety is here, so I shall refrain from making any reference to that and to the paper it may or may not use — and I say that with a smile to the Minister.
Regarding the central point about the success of disposable paper bags in the South, as I indicated in my first answer, we are working with the retail industry and anticipate bringing forward an aspect of that after various meetings over the summer. I plan to announce this in a number of weeks. Views are split on whether or not we can tax plastic bags, as happens in the South. The best legal advice at present is that we cannot say that we cannot do it. However, even if we can, there is a certain gestation period, and it could not be done in the life of this Assembly. In the autumn I plan to do something with plastic bags in conjunction with retailers and others. The community has wakened up to waste — we have to build on that and deliver something.

Ring of Gullion

Mr John Fee: 6. asked the Minister of the Environment what progress has been made in implementing the recommendations made in the designation guide booklet for the Ring of Gullion area of outstanding natural beauty.
(AQO 58/02)

Mr Dermot Nesbitt: The implementation of the recommendations in the guide to designation falls to several public bodies and community groups, including my Department. Progress has been greatly helped by the appointment of a liaison officer funded by the Environment and Heritage Service in my Department, Newry and Mourne District Council and the Regeneration of South Armagh Trust. Among the steps taken are the establishment of a Ring of Gullion waymarked trail and the development of interpretative panels and published guides on historic and traditional buildings in the area. Several improvements to the agricultural landscape have also been achieved through the environmentally sensitive area scheme, administered by the Department of Agriculture and Rural Development.

Mr John Fee: I thank the Minister for the work done by his Department and other agencies over recent years to promote a very beautiful part of Northern Ireland — south Armagh.
Will the Minister specifically address the issues raised about military installations in relation to part of the designation guide, because one of the policy objectives is to diminish the impact of the military installations on public enjoyment of the rural amenities in south Armagh and the Ring of Gullion?
I ask him to redouble his efforts to ensure that that impact is eradicated completely.

Mr Dermot Nesbitt: I shall be brief in my answer to this question. I want to see the day come rapidly when the military installations to which Mr Fee refers are not here — namely, when we have peace, stability and a normal society in Northern Ireland.

Mr Sam Foster: Having had an interest in areas of outstanding natural beauty both as a councillor and as a Minister, I would like to know what progress has been made in considering the need to designate national parks in Northern Ireland?

Mr Dermot Nesbitt: That has been pressed upon me by various quarters. I am conscious that two national parks have been created recently in Scotland and that there are national parks in the South of Ireland, England and Wales. I have commissioned Europac, an independent agency, to advance principles by which we consider national parks in Northern Ireland. It will report to me within the next few days, and I will make a statement on the way forward before the end of the month. However, I remind Mr Foster and others that anything we wish to do needs money, and money requires commitment. National parks could make a significant contribution to tourism and to Northern Ireland’s economy. Therefore, we should find some money for that if we discover that that is the way forward.

Consultation Process

Mr Ian Paisley Jnr: 8. asked the Minister of the Environment to outline the consultation process his Department engaged in with the Construction Employers Federation before imposing a moratorium on planning permissions.
(AQO 5/02)

Mr Dermot Nesbitt: I have already stated that a moratorium has not been imposed on planning permissions. As a precautionary measure, decisions on planning applications in several areas affected by concerns over the risks of water pollution from sewage treatment plants and sewerage networks have not been taken pending the outcome of discussions between my Department and the Department for Regional Development. Those discussions involve the consideration of complex legal, environmental and operational factors.
I am acutely aware of the concerns of the construction industry and others about the precautionary steps that my Department has taken in those areas where the risk of water pollution is significant. My officials have had regular contact with the Construction Employers Federation, both on specific applications and on the generality of the issue. I also met with senior representatives of the Construction Employers Federation to hear their concerns at first hand on 22 August 2002. I repeat the commitment that I gave them to seek a balanced and pragmatic solution with sustainable development as the guiding principle. The federation accepts that principle.

Firefighters’ Pay

Mr Donovan McClelland: I wish to advise Members on how I propose to conduct the debate, which has been allocated two hours by the Business Committee. Three amendments have been selected and published on the Marshalled List. Speaking times will be as follows: the mover of the substantive motion will have 10 minutes to propose and five minutes to wind; the mover of each of the amendments will have seven minutes to propose and five minutes to wind; the Minister will have 20 minutes to respond to the debate; and all other Members who wish to speak will have five minutes each. The amendments will be proposed in the order in which they appear on the Marshalled List. When the debate is concluded, I shall put the Question on amendment No 1. If amendment No 1 is made, amendments Nos 2 and 3 will fall. If amendment No 1 falls, I shall put the Question on amendment No 2 and so forth. If that is clear, we shall proceed.

Mr Ian Paisley Jnr: I beg to move
That this Assembly recognises the valuable and courageous work undertaken by the Fire Service and calls for an immediate review of pay and conditions for firefighters to ensure that these accurately reflect the highly skilled and professional role undertaken by firefighters and fire control staff.
I welcome the opportunity to bring this most important matter before the House. It is a reflection of the professionalism of the firefighters of Northern Ireland and of the high regard in which they are held by the public that the House has agreed to make the subject of the first debate of the new term the pay and conditions that we ask these professionals to labour under. The number of amendments also indicates the great interest in the issue.
(Madam Deputy Speaker [Ms Morrice] in the Chair)
It should not go unnoticed by the men and women of the Fire Service — and some of its representatives are in the Public Gallery today — who put their lives on the line every day they put on a uniform that we consider their efforts so important that we wish to debate this matter of urgent public concern.
My first duty as an elected Member of this House was a very sad and deeply distressing visit to the Glebe housing estate in my North Antrim constituency. A horrendous house fire had been started deliberately and had taken the lives of three little children. The local fire service, assisted by another unit, worked for hours and put their lives at risk trying to rescue those little boys. I remember standing in the burnt-out surroundings of that housing estate with firemen, police officers, residents and politicians silenced by the tragedy and weeping. I remember thinking of the grim and awful task that we ask those brave men and women of the Fire Service to do for us.
We call those officers brave, but if we look at how we pay them, it is as if their bravery is cheap. The House must send out a message that firefighters and the control staff who guide them deserve, and have earned, better pay. The Assembly has already acknowledged the role of the firefighters by awarding the Fire Service its own official recognition. We must take that forward by demanding that the Government get real in their negotiations with the Fire Fighters’ Union and come up with a pay formula that will satisfy and reward fairly the work of those people.
For that reason I am prepared to accept the amendment to my motion tabled in the name of the Rev Robert Coulter and Mr Tom Hamilton as it adds to the substance of the motion. I am rejecting the amendment tabled by Mr Ervine, the Member for East Belfast, because stating an actual amount will tie the hands of those engaged in negotiations. The motion is not prescriptive. It allows for the necessary flexibility to enable employees’ representatives and employers to agree a pay and conditions formula that will work.
The Sinn Féin/IRA amendment adds nothing of substance to the motion. Rather, it reflects its earlier failure to get a motion similar to mine debated today. I hope that it will not use this debate to try to pose as champions of the Fire Service but will withdraw its amendment to my motion.
Given the history of the last 30 years, perhaps Members sitting under that Gallery could tell us about the actions of the IRA that put the lives of firefighters at risk and resulted in nine members of the Fire Service being killed while on duty. I hope that it is not the intention of Sinn Féin/IRA to sully and sour today’s debate with a trite amendment — I hope that it will be withdrawn.
We read in the press daily about the bravery and professionalism of firefighters. While I was preparing for this debate last week, the ‘News Letter’ reported an injury sustained by a firefighter at a fire at Yolande’s farming service yard at Wellington Road, Enniskillen. He was injured when he was hit by pieces of an exploding corrugated sheet of asbestos. We cannot get away from the routine of a firefighter’s job, which is to risk his or her life on behalf of this society.
It is important that I take time to outline the negotiations on pay. They have been taking place between the national union and the national employers since June this year. The Fire Brigades Union was informed that it was the intention of the employers to make a substantive offer on pay and a new formula as far back as 9 July. It has proof that it was planned to offer the fighters an increase in pay from £21,500 to £25,000 for a trained officer with four years’ service. However, it is believed that an intervention by a senior Government Minister meant that that offer was never formally tabled. Instead the Government started talking about making a substantial pay increase of 4% and proposed an independent inquiry into the entire service.
On 2 September the employers’ spokesman, Phil White, conceded that there was a real case for a pay increase above the Government’s so-called substantial 4% increase but argued that central Government funding was required. The Assembly must avoid being sucked into the Government speak of agreeing to a "substantial" pay increase that in real terms means 4%. The union has correctly rejected that as insulting and derisory. A typical firefighter, after four years of training, has a take-home pay of £280 a week. The hourly rate for part-timers, for whom the dangers are no different, is £6·20 before tax. Some 11% of their salary goes towards the occupational pension. That pay formula dates back to 1977, when firefighters’ pay was linked to low-skilled manual workers. It is outdated and inappropriate.
By its actions today, the Assembly must determine that it believes firefighters to be highly skilled professionals. Therefore, the Assembly must endorse the call to give them professional levels of pay and conditions and a formula to reach those conditions. The motion is not about special treatment; it is about fair treatment for those professional officers.
Tony Blair’s deceitful comments must also be highlighted. He claimed that an increase in pay and conditions would hurt the economy. That must be challenged and nailed as a lie. The total UK claim to increase pay to acceptable levels would amount to around £459 million. That is the equivalent of around 41p for each household every week. Surely that is not an unreasonable cost for the remarkable job that those officers do. I hope that the House unites behind the motion and accepts the amendment that I have advised.

Ms Jane Morrice: I call Mr David Ervine to propose the first amendment on the Marshalled List.
The following amendment stood on the Marshalled List:
Amendment No 1: In line 2 delete
"and calls for an immediate review of pay and conditions for fire fighter to ensure that these"
and insert
"and supports the Fire Brigades Union in its call for a professional wage of £30,000 to". [Mr Ervine]

Mr David Ervine: I offer the amendment for a simple reason. The Fire Brigades Union itself decreed that a reasonable figure for firefighters to earn was £30,000 a year. I cannot imagine how, by including that figure in the amendment, I stultify the negotiators’ position, when it was the union that introduced the figure of £30,000 to the negotiating table. That dismisses any foolish comment that my proposed amendment is flawed.
Ian Paisley Jnr has hit the nail on the head, but he has not been as definitive as we must be on what is happening. We are talking about a process of negotiation on pay and conditions that was stymied, not by those in management, but by the Government. We can see that there is clear political manipulation in trying to peg the wages and conditions of firefighters — people whom we value.
This year alone, the Fire Service has rescued 110 people from road traffic accidents. In many cases, those people’s lives were saved. Some 147 people have been rescued from house fires, and more than 100 other rescues have taken place. We should think about that when we drive home, or when we turn out the lights and go to bed at night. We should think about who is at the end of the telephone, offering us help in our time of need. We should be aware that, in our society, those same people not only run a grave risk by having to speed to assist us, but they are attacked by recreational idiots as they do so. The Fire Service and the security services have had to put up with the nightmare that is the interfaces. It is not an easy job.
Would any of us easily come to terms with the rest of our working day, the rest of our working week or, indeed, the rest of our working life, if we had to carry a child of two, three or four years of age with lovely flowing hair, without a mark on her, who had asphyxiated in a fire? How would we live with that trauma when we went home?
What do we do to recognise the suffering of those who rush to the aid of victims? What would we do were we to face a road traffic accident that involved a decapitation and then had to go home to be offered a meal? What goes through firefighters’ minds?
This is not only about the physical abilities that they undoubtedly show in their professionalism and training — they pay an unbelievable psychological price. If they are fathers, mothers or members of a family, they must relate to others after going through such difficulty. That is the job that we ask them to do, and then we pay them, in relative terms, a pittance for doing it.
Then we find out that we have a "Socialist" Government who try to control the management in order to make sure that it pegs the levels of pay to the workers. It used to be the other way round. Socialist Governments used to try to encourage management to look at the best interests of the workers and to look at the circumstances in which they might create a greater income rather than a lesser one. We live in a strange world.
My amendment is definitive and clear and would consolidate the concept of political support in our small society to stand as a bulwark against the Westminster Government. It is fair to say that neither the motion nor the amendments contain any opposition to a better deal for firefighters. Why not make it simple and clear and support the level of pay that the Fire Brigades Union is asking for? I did not pluck my figure out of the air. It is the figure that the Fire Brigades Union has tabled to management. In accepting and supporting that figure, Members would be saying that the shameful behaviour that has taken place in the six negotiations to date must end. In the words of my Colleague Mr Paisley Jnr, the Government must "get real" about dealing with this issue.
I was once a negotiator in the trade union movement. It is not unreasonable to ask for the sun, the moon and the stars. On the level playing surface that can be created in the negotiating process, one expects that a compromise will be found. I fear that what has happened to the Fire Brigades Union is nefarious. The involvement of the Government has created the conditions that not only polluted the negotiations that have taken place but potentially pollute the negotiations that the other amendments and the motion call for in the future. Would it not be better for the House to say — clearly and simply — that the firefighters say they are worth £600 per week and that, because of the behaviour of management and the Government, Members determine that that is what they should have. That would allow the firefighters to go into a proper negotiation with at least some sense of political support, as opposed to what they consider to be the manipulation by politicians in the background.
The following amendment stood on the Marshalled List:
Amendment No 2: In line 2 delete
"an immediate review of pay and conditions for"
and insert
"a significant increase in the salaries of" —[Ms Ramsey] [Mr Kelly]

Mr John Kelly: Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. On behalf of the firemen’s union, I must say that the comments of Paisley Jnr do not help the Assembly to have a unified approach to trying to put a sympathetic face on what the firemen’s union is looking for. My Colleague Sue Ramsey and I have met the firemen’s union on a number of occasions and have a fruitful and constructive relationship with it. It is out of place for the proposer of the motion to indulge in a diatribe against those in the Assembly who are attempting to support the firemen’s union. [Interruption].
You may snigger and laugh, you are good at that; that is all you are good at.
Nick Raynsford said:
"We all greatly value the contribution that Fire Service staff make to public safety".
He also said that the new formula worked out by the Government equated the firemen with the top 50% of manual workers.
I am not deriding manual workers, but can anyone tell me how you can evaluate the work of the Fire Service on the criteria of manual workers? From the very outset, the Government have done the Fire Service a disservice. I speak as an Assembly Member and as a longstanding and current member of the AMICUS trade union, which was the old engineering and boilermakers’ union. Therefore, I have some knowledge of trade unions and negotiations and how we evaluate the work of trade unions in the workplace and in society. Those who have never had to put their hand to manual work perhaps do not understand what it is to work in the workplace and do not understand what it is to attempt to earn their crust of bread there. You have got your money from the backs of an electorate that you have seduced for the past 50 years.

Ms Jane Morrice: Will the Member address his remarks through the Chair?

Mr John Kelly: Madam Deputy Speaker, if you would exert some influence over the rabble here on the left —

Ms Jane Morrice: Order. Will the Member address his remarks through the Chair?

Mr John Kelly: I will, yes — [Interruption].

Ms Jane Morrice: Order.

Mr John Kelly: Again we see the hypocrisy of a group that introduces a motion for firemen and tries to disrupt the debate on that motion: it is a disgrace. They talk about withdrawing — they should withdraw their motion and leave it to the rest of us to consider how we approach this serious matter — [Interruption].

Ms Jane Morrice: Order.

Mr John Kelly: The Secretary of State said that it is nothing short of a disgrace that people such as firemen who come into public service and the protection of life — the mouse Morrow is indulging in his squeaks — are subjected to an increasing number of attacks as they try to carry out their jobs. He goes on to say that we should all be proud of emergency workers such as firefighters who put their lives on the line to save others.
As Davy Ervine said, it is a Socialist Government. However, the Secretary of State cannot stand up and say that he supports the claim of the firefighters. He cannot say that he supports this trade union as a member of a party that comes from a trade unionist background — a party that the trade unions keep in office by their contributions. The Government are treating the representatives of that union, and their attempts to achieve a decent wage comparable to the professionalism that their members bring to the job, in a shabby manner.
I support the firefighters, my party supports the firefighters and my Colleague Sue Ramsey, who is a member of the Committee for Health, Social Services and Public safety, supports the firefighters in their attempts to achieve their just rewards and recognition not through fine words but through take-home pay. That is what counts at the end of the day, week, month and year — that is what puts the bread on their tables. In order to have unified support, I will not be moving our amendment.
Amendment No 2 not moved.

Rev Robert Coulter: I beg to move amendment No 3:
In line 2 delete
"an immediate review of pay and conditions"
and insert
"the introduction of a new pay formula together with a commensurate level of pay".
In proposing the amendment my intention is to make the motion being debated before the Assembly today more specific as to the real problem and the remedy required for the firefighters’ situation. The heart of the problem lies within the present pay formula for firefighters. Only two substantive grades exist in current pay scales for ordinary firefighters — that of firefighter and that of leading firefighter.
The second grade relates to those who have over 15 years’ service. In short, the pay scales provide no real possibility for promotion, except for the few firefighters promoted to management grades. The pay scales should contain promotion possibilities for ordinary firefighters, which recognise skill and experience as well as experience, but which do not reserve pay and promotion for purely managerial functions.
There is deserved, widespread public support for the firefighters. I support them too. They deserve a decent pay scale and expressions of public support. We should not be niggardly in that matter. We should be open and generous to those brave people who regularly risk their lives.
No one could fail to be moved by the scenes of last 11 September in New York, when 350 firefighters lost their lives while trying to evacuate the twin towers of the World Trade Centre. The whole world admired the courage and heroism of the firefighters of that great city.
Our firefighters are no less courageous. They are in the same league, because, during the 30 years of the troubles, they were at their posts in impossible and horrendous situations, and many people owe their lives to them. Let the House record our deep appreciation to them in this debate.
A recent poll showed that 82% of all voters believe that ordinary firefighters should be paid in excess of £25,000 a year, as opposed to the existing maximum of only £20,694, which can only be achieved after 15 years’ service. The same poll showed that 47% of all voters support a national Fire Service strike over pay.
The Prime Minister’s statement that giving the firefighters what they are asking for will somehow put up mortgages is totally unacceptable. The link between the two issues escapes me entirely.
It is a shame that brave people have been reduced to taking strike action. It is an indictment of our society that they need to go on strike after having done so much for that society. We know that it goes against the grain of their profession. I want to sound a note of warning to Her Majesty’s Government; their treatment of the firefighters should be fair and generous, not penny-pinching.
The pay of part-time firemen must also be mentioned. They are no less at risk in perilous situations, but their rates of pay are worse than those of the full-time firefighters, and that situation must be properly addressed also.
For all those reasons, I deliberately worded the amendment to include a pay formula, as opposed to simply calling for a pay increase. The Fire Service, with all its skill and expertise, needs a proper pay structure that adequately reflects the high level of training, skill and expertise required of ordinary firefighters. I welcome the fact that the Members who proposed the motion have accepted my amendment. That alone reflects the widespread community support for the firefighters.

Dr Joe Hendron: Having spent many years at the political front line in west Belfast, I have the most profound admiration for the courage and professionalism of the Fire Service in Belfast and beyond.
The Committee for Health, Social Services and Public Safety has a direct interest in the motion because of the Health Minister’s responsibility for public safety and the Northern Ireland Fire Service. The motion is an opportunity for everyone to acknowledge the outstanding work of firefighters. The Committee has always recognised their valuable and courageous service, and we all agree that the Fire Service is a vital asset to the community.
The events of 11 September last year, and the sacrifices made by the Fire Department of New York, emphasise that firefighters everywhere put their lives in danger daily to save the lives of ordinary people. We can be proud that our Fire Service is manned by some of the most professional and dedicated firefighters, officers and staff to be found anywhere. The Committee visited the Fire Control Centre in Lisburn and saw how the Fire Service responds to the needs of ordinary people 24 hours a day, 365 days a year. We talked to the men and women who man the fire appliances about the skills and expertise they need to do their jobs properly. We have also heard from the Fire Brigades Union about the personal dangers that firefighters face daily when responding to emergency calls.
Members of the Health Committee raised the issue of the firefighters’ pay dispute in a Committee meeting last week, and it was agreed that firefighters’ pay should adequately reflect the skills and expertise needed to carry out their jobs effectively. As with other essential public service workers, firefighters should receive a level of pay that reflects the nature of their job. If they are currently underpaid and require a substantial pay increase to bring pay into line with the proper rate for doing a difficult job, that is what should happen — and they are grossly underpaid.
Pay constitutes the biggest cost to the Health Service and consumes 70% of its budget, which is already overstretched. Some of my Colleagues may be sympathetic to the call for a review of the pay and conditions of firefighters to establish what they should be paid. However, as other Members have pointed out, I understand why firefighters are opposed to the general review called for by the Prime Minister and the Deputy Prime Minister.
It is a national dispute, and we have limited influence over its outcome. However, in supporting the call for a substantial increase, the public needs to know that it is justified, and I am sure that the Minister can make that point strongly.
Nick Raynsford has appointed Sir George Bain to conduct the review, a man for whom we all have great respect. However, I appreciate the points made by the Fire Brigades Union. The Health Committee will keep a close watch on the situation in the days and weeks to come, and I have sought an urgent briefing from the Department about the current position and the progress of the national pay negotiations.
I appreciate Sinn Féin’s withdrawal of its amendment. I understand the point David Ervine is making in his amendment and the reason for a professional wage of £30,000. However, it is not for the Assembly to name a figure in negotiations other than to say that they deserve a substantial rise, and I am pleased that Mr Paisley Jnr has accepted Mr Coulter’s amendment.

Mrs Eileen Bell: I support the motion. I am glad that the proposers have accepted the Ulster Unionist amendment, which I also support. I support Mr Ervine’s amendment; however, Alliance will abstain from the vote for two reasons. The Fire Brigades Union has proposed a sum of £30,000, but the Government and the Prime Minister have not listened, and I doubt whether they will listen to us at this stage.
Unfortunately, I missed the start of the debate. However, I believe the proposer of the motion said that there might be a problem in putting down an amount. By creating a ceiling of £30,000, we may prejudice any future pay formula that would recommend a higher salary. I applaud the withdrawal of the Sinn Féin amendment. Members should stand up to speak for the firefighters, and only for the firefighters.
Last year, the Assembly presented Northern Ireland’s firefighters with an award and a plaque in recognition of their bravery over the years, from the Blitz until the present day. I was shocked to learn that the salaries of those brave men and women have not been negotiated since 1977. An unacceptable number of firefighters with young families have to apply for income support or "do the double". I know someone who has been a firefighter for 22 years. His 27-year-old son earns much more than he. That is also unacceptable. As Rev Robert Coulter said, the whole structure must be examined.
Firefighters have saved countless lives, have prevented many incidents from becoming more serious and have put their lives on the line every time that they "go out on a shout". Television programmes do not convey the tension and fear that have been described to me by firefighters and which are present every time they go out. Members are aware of the recent upsurge in attacks on firefighters reporting to fires or other incidents.
Modern firefighters must tackle not only the flames but fumes from drugs and explosives; yet their salaries have not been examined for over 20 years. That is why my party feels that rather than start another review, talks on the introduction of a new pay formula and structure that reflects the arduous nature of the job should commence as soon as possible, despite what the Government and the Prime Minister say.
I have written to the Prime Minister about the pay dispute and have been told that the Government are considering a review. I am afraid that my reply may not be accepted; however, I asked what the point of another review would be and whether it was necessary when it is clear that firefighters’ salary levels — apart from anything else — are outdated and do not in any way reflect the true nature of the job.
The firefighters of Northern Ireland have never willingly turned back from any situation, however dangerous. They deserve more than the plaque that the Assembly awarded them last year. They received it gratefully. However, we must give them more practical support. I would certainly endorse a review of the Fire Authority, which clearly does not hold the confidence of the fire crews, who feel that their interests are not being best served by that body.
We remember the brave deeds of the firefighters of New York who were killed or injured on 11 September 2001. Last December, I visited survivors and families of the deceased. Their stories were harrowing. However, as Dr Hendron said, even at that time they told us about the great practical support that Northern Ireland’s firefighters gave them and said that firefighters could never be paid enough for the difficult task that they are asked to do. What price do the Government put on the salaries and conditions of people who daily save lives, protect businesses and work for every citizen in the community? Not a high price, obviously. It is up to the Assembly to ensure that they listen.

Ms Jane Morrice: Can the Member draw her remarks to a close?

Mrs Eileen Bell: Members have a duty to send a clear message to the Government. The whole salary and management structure must be dealt with head-on. If that is done, the £30,000 figure, or above, will become a reality. There will then be no need for firefighters to consider strike action, which they will only do as a last resort.

Mr Norman Boyd: The Northern Ireland Unionist Party supports the campaign for improved pay and conditions for the Fire Service. The party believes that firefighters carry out a vital and dangerous role in Northern Ireland, and it appreciates the fact that Fire Service personnel daily put their lives at risk to preserve lives and property.
The dangers faced by fire officers in Northern Ireland are well known. They continue to play a front-line role in the face of ongoing terrorist activity, despite the denials of some in the Assembly. Members of the Fire Service have to cope with the aftermath of appalling atrocities. They continually have to deal with disgraceful attacks on vehicles and staff by thugs engaged in street violence.
The formula by which firefighters’ pay is determined is outdated and no longer appropriate to deliver adequate pay and conditions for them and other emergency fire control staff. Given the level of training, the operational duties of firefighters and the circumstances in which they must work, the present level of pay — typically around £280 per week — is inadequate.
There has been a vast and dramatic increase in the workload of the Fire Service in the past 30 years as regards calls received, incidents attended and fire safety duties. There has also been an increase in the range and specialist features of equipment, technology, skills and knowledge required. Therefore, firefighters’ claim for a review of pay and conditions is wholly justified.
In 1981, 15,838 calls were made to the Fire Service. Twenty years later, in 2001, the service attended 39,055 calls.
There are four aspects to the Fire Brigades Union’s pay claim: a pay increase to £30,000 for full-time professional firefighters; pay parity for emergency fire control staff; pay equality for professional firefighters working the retained duty system; and a new pay formula to reflect the professionalism of firefighters and emergency fire control staff.
The Northern Ireland Unionist Party believes that the Fire Service has a very strong case for an immediate review of pay and conditions to ensure that the professional role undertaken by highly skilled firefighters and fire control staff is adequately reflected. I am sympathetic to the firefighters’ claim for a significant increase in salaries and better working conditions. It is therefore vital that their essential contribution to society be fully recognised and accordingly rewarded in order to maintain the Fire Service’s high standards and professional service.

Prof Monica McWilliams: It is clear from what we have heard and the information that we received from the Fire Brigades Union that there has been an enormous wage drift. I was appalled to learn from the union, when it met me, that there has not been a review of firefighters’ pay formula since 1977. How did that situation arise in the first place?
Firefighters’ pay can be compared to that of police officers, ambulance staff and nurses. It is clear that police officers decided a few years ago to adopt a salary scheme that included an annual increment for young constables, who could then progress to the rank of sergeant and further up the career ladder. It seems, however, that firefighters do not have that prospect. The main problem seems to be that they cannot move beyond the £21,000 mark, making their career prospects pretty bleak unless they move on to restricted categories, where numbers are quite small. Many — indeed, the vast majority — reach a ceiling after 10 or 15 years.
Everyone agrees that a review is both necessary and urgent. The absence of a review to date makes one wonder what the Fire Authority of Northern Ireland was doing and, indeed, what happened to the negotiations with the National Joint Council and the employers’ bodies.
The only other group that appears to have fallen so far behind are nurses. Strangely, nurses’ salaries have always been explained on the basis that the profession suffered because the majority of staff were women who entered the profession for vocational reasons, motivated by a caring responsibility rather than salary. Those days are long gone, and people ought to be paid for the skills that they put in.
Student nurses from the Royal College of Nursing who visited Parliament Buildings today told me that they receive only £5,000 per annum during their three years’ training and that for many years thereafter they can expect to receive only £15,000 at the most. Therefore, like the firefighters, they end up asking one part of Government to ask another part of the Government to top up their wages. In this case, the Minister of Health, Social Services and Public Safety is responsible for firefighters, and Nigel Dodds, the Minister for Social Development, is responsible for family credit, tax and other benefits.
As we have joined-up Government, it seems reasonable to examine how firefighters can avoid depending on benefits to top up their low pay. A review of the pay formula is long overdue and should be agreed urgently. Firefighters do not need to make any further case when we consider the comparisons between ambulance staff and firefighters. Firefighters have now moved on to professional grades, yet their salaries are still associated with that upper quartile of male manual workers. What antiquated language. I am glad that they were not equated with female manual workers — how much worse off they would have been then.
We fully support pay parity for the emergency fire control staff, most of whom are women. They in turn earn even less — 92% of qualified firefighters’ wages — yet the firefighters and the union tell us that they could not do their jobs without that highly skilled, professional group of workers. I also argue for pay equality for the retained fire officers, of whom there seems to be an equivalent number in Northern Ireland.
It is good that the entire Assembly is throwing its weight behind this. My only difficulty with the PUP amendment is that a starting salary of £30,000 would put firefighters’ salaries clearly beyond those of police officers, ambulance staff and nurses. We do not want to move in that direction. Given how shockingly poor their starting salary is, I agree that it was right to pitch so high, knowing that that pitch will not be successful. I understand the sentiments behind that. Nonetheless, I urge everyone to throw his or her weight behind the motion today. If the PUP amendment falls — and it appears that it will — the Assembly must send out a unanimous message that this matter should be given urgent attention.

Mrs Iris Robinson: As a member of the Committee for Health, Social Services and Public Safety, I congratulate my Colleagues on bringing this timely motion to the Floor of the House. Fire Service pay is determined by a formula that has kept industrial peace since 1977. That formula was agreed following the only national strike by the British Fire Service, but it has not maintained Fire Service wages in line with those of other workers.
A professional firefighters’s job has changed dramatically since the 1970s. I shall highlight how their role and responsibilities have changed by comparing statistics from 1971 with some from 2001. Last year, Northern Ireland’s firefighters were called out eight-and-a-half times more than they were 30 years ago. Actual fires have increased almost 10-fold, with false alarms up by a factor of 16 to almost 13,000 last year, which is a worrying trend. In 1971, special services, which deal with road accidents and chemical spillages, were called out 85 times. The corresponding figure for 2001 was 1,615. In 1977-78, there was a national strike by firefighters over pay demands. Everything possible must be done to prevent that happening again.
Despite its high-profile public campaign, there appears to have been little effort on the part of the National Joint Council for Local Authorities’ Fire Brigades and its standing subcommittee to address seriously firefighters’ demands. We must be responsible about pay demands. I want firefighters to be paid what they deserve, not to be given preferential treatment. I do not advocate overpaying firefighters but rather a pay structure that reflects the demands of a skilled and often hazardous job. We, as a society, must be careful not to allow ourselves to be put in a position where, on a whim, we can be held to ransom by strike threats because the role of some groups is so crucial to the health and safety of the public. Having said that, the Fire Brigades Union has exercised a great deal of restraint over the years. Many others, such as nurses and ambulance crews, are also underpaid; I do not want them to threaten strike action, but that does not diminish the fact that they too deserve salary increases. Firefighters do much more than put out fires. They are involved in water rescues and incidents which involve radiation, contamination and the spillage of chemicals. They cut victims free from road and train crashes, as well as doing what we all saw so graphically almost exactly a year ago. Furthermore, they assist bravely when buildings collapse or when people become trapped.
The duties of firefighters and the levels of skill demanded of them have increased. There is a greater range and specialisation of equipment and technology involved. Firefighters rightly believe that the salaries of emergency fire control staff should be raised to match their own. In addition, they want a better deal for part-time staff. Currently there are hundreds of part-time firefighters in the province. Without them, stations such as Newtownards, Carrickfergus and Portadown would not be able to function. They deserve more than the current meagre annual retainer and merit the same rate as full-time firefighters when they deal with calls.
Firefighters in Northern Ireland deal with the same dangers as their counterparts throughout Great Britain. They have the added fear of coming under attack when called out to a fire. Over the last 30 years in Northern Ireland we have never been short of mindless violence. However, the increasingly common attacks on firemen and paramedics in emergency situations here defy belief. How can it be explained to visitors to the province that emergency services, while risking their lives in order to save the lives of others, can come under attack from the very community they serve? No amount of money could adequately pay firefighters for enduring the risk of a brick coming through the windscreen, or worse.
On 4 September at the Committee for Health, Social Services and Public Safety, Members from all parties were supportive of the firefighters’ demands for a pay increase. The firefighters have had my support throughout the campaign.

Ms Jane Morrice: The Member will please draw her remarks to a close.

Mrs Iris Robinson: I have written to the Prime Minister, asking that he support a substantial increase in pay for firefighters throughout the country. I hope that that will be the case, despite his unhelpful comments on 3 September at his press conference.

Ms Sue Ramsey: Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. I too welcome the opportunity to discuss the serious issue of the pay of both firefighters and staff. Members have already highlighted the concerns. The Minister and Members recognise the commitment and acknowledge the courageous work of the firefighters, and there is an opportunity for the Assembly formally to highlight that and to thank them again.
Members have mentioned that the matter was discussed at the Committee for Health, Social Services and Public Safety, where it was agreed that the Chairperson should write to Tony Blair to outline our concerns and support the concerns and issues raised by the Fire Brigades Union. It will be interesting to see his response.
The Chairperson, Dr Hendron, highlighted the fact that pay is the single biggest cost to the Health Service. Something approaching 70% of the budget goes on pay. However, pay and associated costs are not negotiated locally, and that must be examined. I do not want to go over the flaws in the formula which has been in use for some 20 years. It is outdated, and there are flaws.
I agree with Ian Paisley Jnr who said that the Assembly should sing from the same hymn sheet. Perhaps he could influence his school friends and ask them to settle down, because in the interests of Assembly unity Sinn Féin agreed not to move an amendment to the motion.
Moreover, I agree with David Ervine that it is wrong that there has been political input into negotiations with senior management and the union.
Bob Coulter was absolutely right in his message to Tony Blair that the Fire Service’s pay increase should be generous and not penny-pinching.
I point out again that, in the interests of Assembly unity, Members are agreed and show that they are united in support of the Fire Brigade. Our amendment was not moved for that reason.
We demand a first-class service from the Fire Service, and, therefore, it is only right that it should demand first-class salaries from us.

Mr Sam Foster: I apologise for my absence earlier; I was at an important meeting.
During more than three decades of the most dangerous circumstances, often amid violence and difficulty, the Fire Service has given outstanding service to our community. Firefighters were often at the forefront of trouble, unsure whether a bomb would explode or a building would collapse on them as they went to fight a fire. The events in New York on 11 September last year highlight the great and imminent danger that firefighters face in their valiant work.
It is sad that, despite firefighters’ admirable bravery in overcoming such danger, thugs in our community attack them when they attend fires during incidents of communal strife. As I read in a local daily newspaper, it is incredible that firefighters attended more than 500 civil disturbances between January and August 2002. Outrageously, 84 appliances were damaged and many firefighters were injured. What is wrong with people that they should attack firefighters, who provide our community with such an invaluable service? Do they not realise that when they injure a firefighter or damage an appliance, they increase the risk of death for someone’s loved one and, if they have any, their own nearest and dearest?
The dedication and commitment of Fire Service personnel in peace and strife are admirable, and they deserve thanks and appreciation for their valued and unstinting service, often under the most undue danger and pressures. I am sure that all Members join me in commending them for their sterling work.
As I stated in July, I will support any improvement to the terms and conditions of Fire Service personnel, commensurate with their undoubted skills, value and service to our community. Over the years, the service rendered to this community has been so commendable, admirable and vital that we could not have done without it. We must be as considerate in our support for the Fire Service, as it, in recognition of its role, will be in its requirements. I fully support the motion as amended. The work of the Fire Service is outstanding, even amid such adversity. The bravery of Fire Service personnel must be rewarded and acknowledged.

Mr Alban Maginness: At this stage of the debate, little remains to be said. Despite the little frissons between Sinn Féin and the DUP, there has been a remarkable degree of consensus. However, it is the first day back at school, so Members should make allowances for that. It is remarkable — [Interruption].

Rev Dr Ian Paisley: Would you like to join in the spirit of the first day back?

Mr Alban Maginness: Pardon?

Ms Jane Morrice: Order.

Mr Alban Maginness: The consensus is impressive and reflects the respect that people have for the Fire Service. It is important that Members support firefighters, especially at such a crucial time in their discussions with the Government. The Government’s review, which is under way, evades the central issue: firefighters should have a proper pay formula, as adumbrated in the amendment tabled by Rev Robert Coulter, and should receive a significant and immediate pay increase to reflect the increasing risks that they face. The risks to firefighters, especially to their health, and to firefighting equipment increase each year, and society owes the Fire Service a tremendous amount.
I am baffled by the Westminster Government’s penny-pinching attitude, which has been seen in many other things that they have done here. One would think that a Labour Government in particular would support the firemen’s just demands, especially when that Government are about to embark on an adventure in Iraq on which they will waste millions, if not billions, of pounds in armaments. I cannot understand for the life of me why the Government do not fairly address the firemen’s just and reasonable demands, and that opinion is reflected in the House.
When the motion is inevitably passed as amended, it will be a morale booster to the firemen’s trade union. I hope that it will help to strengthen its position, bring the Westminster Government to their senses and avoid the disaster for the community that a firemen’s strike would be. That can be avoided through negotiation and through the Government’s coming to the firemen’s trade union with a reasonable proposition before any sort of industrial action is either proposed or taken. I hope that that will result in part from this united motion.
Furthermore, the SDLP fully supports the emergency fire control staff and the retained firemen in their quest for equality. The central point to which I return is that industrial peace, which has existed in the public sector for so long, is the result of the establishment of a just and modern pay formula, and that formula will properly reward firemen financially. The central issue is not a mere pay increase, but the implementation of the actual formula.

Ms Jane Morrice: I ask the Member to draw his remarks to a close.

Mr Paul Berry: I support the motion proposed by Mr Paisley Jnr and Mr Shannon. I also support the amendment tabled in the name of the Rev Robert Coulter, and I welcome the debate.
Of all the occupations that schoolchildren want to follow, that of a firefighter probably tops the list. Their uniforms, equipment and, indeed, the professionalism that they have displayed over the past 30 years or more give charisma in children’s minds. However, regrettably, maturity brings a sobering appreciation of the hazardous nature of firefighting. Tragically, in Northern Ireland that job is more hazardous than elsewhere. Unlike in New York, where firefighters are looked upon as heroes, in this country they are stoned, and their equipment is destroyed. Too often fire engines are vandalised out of action. Last year alone, over 30 firefighters were injured — not from fighting fires, but as a result of civil disturbances, which is a polite way of saying that thugs deliberately targeted them. That is, of course, unsurprising, because we have an ethical system that applauds the pursuit of power through the barrel of a gun. It is only to be expected that the drip feed of that reaches the streets and makes stoning firefighters quite rational.
The firefighters’ request for a pay increase is reasonable. I subscribe to the principle that the labourer is worthy of his hire. Few would reject the sensible case that the Fire Service puts before us, and the failure to agree a mutually acceptable level of remuneration is tragic.
This matter has been on the table since April 2002. It is acknowledged that the Fire Brigade provides an essential service and that the pay formula requires modernisation. Firefighters’ workloads have increased dramatically, and the current rate of pay does not reflect the nature of the job. The course of action to be taken about a pay rise must be heard. Is an inquiry necessary? We do not need an inquiry that postpones facing up to the issue. Why was an inquiry not set up before now rather than waiting until the last minute? Will setting up an inquiry be an excuse to change conditions in order to avoid giving a decent pay rise? Those questions indicate the haphazard and lax nature of the treatment of the issue. If undertakings were given, why were they not kept? These and other issues appear to be clouding the negotiations and must be dealt with immediately. Will firefighters be told that they do a wonderful job and that the risks involved are appreciated but that they have to claim state benefit if they need more money? That is unfair and unreasonable. The firefighters are asking for £30,000 a year. If that is not considered realistic, they will have to be told so and why. If £25,000 a year is affordable, it should have already been paid out without all the friction. Nothing is gained by issuing misleading press releases and causing confusion.
There has been no strike, or threat of a strike, since 1978; that is a remarkable tribute to both the firefighters and the pay formula that was worked out at that time. Surely the same can be achieved again, without the need for a strike. Why can the issue not be dealt with without firefighters becoming so frustrated and disgruntled that they consider strike action to be their only recourse?
With many others, I support the motion wholeheartedly; I also support the firefighters in their call for a pay rise. We must commend the firefighters across Northern Ireland for their professional and skilled work on behalf of both sides of the community. I support the Fire Brigades Union, commend it for its lobbying and look forward to working with its members in the future. The motion will send a clear message to the Government that enough is enough and that more needs to be done for our male and female firefighters.

Mr Ivan Davis: I congratulate Mr Paisley Jnr for proposing the motion and also my Colleagues for tabling an amendment that Mr Paisley Jnr has agreed has added substance to the motion. I am glad that we are united on this subject. Before the end of the debate I hope that Mr Ervine will withdraw his amendment, and then we will have total agreement.
In the aftermath of 11 September, society reflected on the dangerous but vital role of firefighters. It is terrible that it took that tragedy in the United States to bring home the value of the Fire Service to the Northern Ireland community. As a result of the troubles, Northern Ireland firefighters have had to operate in more dangerous circumstances than their counterparts in the rest of the UK. Over the past few years, we have all been sickened by attacks on the emergency services, including the Ambulance Service and the Fire Service. Instead of appreciating the dedication and commitment of those services, a minority has attacked these workers. The attacks on the Fire Service have been well documented in Belfast and Londonderry, and the Fire Service has advised that many of the attacks were pre-planned; that is worrying.
Nevertheless, it is probable that one day the same thugs will call upon the professional services of our emergency teams. More than 800 firefighters have been injured in the past five years, and nine of their colleagues lost their lives during the troubles. Two years ago in the Chamber I mentioned that one of the first to lose his life was my friend, Mr Wesley Orr, from Lisburn. The award that the House presented to the Northern Ireland Fire Service last July in recognition of its services to all members of the community was justly deserved.
I have pleasure in supporting the merits of the motion, and I urge all Members to support the amendment. There is no doubt that the present formula is out of date; after all, it was established at the end of the nine-week strike in 1977. The formula served the Fire Service well until recently. However, due to the acceleration of the labour markets and occupational change in the workforce in recent years, the pay formula is no longer effective in providing firefighters with a salary that they deserve. A pay structure linked to their skills and experience must be implemented. There should be a differential in pay, depending on the number of years of service and the skills of the individual. It is not simply a matter of awarding a universal pay increase, but of introducing a pay structure that is focused around a firefighter’s career steps.
It is important that any agreement be implemented quickly, as the matter has been in the public domain for some time. It is not in the interest of firefighters’ morale to prolong the process. I support the motion and the amendment.

Mr David Hilditch: I support the motion. I have the greatest admiration and respect for firefighters, whose highly dangerous and skilled work should command appropriate remuneration. Their work must be put in the context of their devotion to duty: they risk their lives to save others and others’ property; and they respond to a variety of difficult situations, from civil strife and road accidents to saving the family pet. A firefighter’s normal shift may incorporate more heroic deeds than many people achieve in a lifetime.
The Fire Service comprises several components. The first component is the whole-time firefighters who work an average 42-hour week for a take-home pay of £21,000 a year after four years of service. That equates to approximately £9·83 an hour. Training drills and practice are incorporated into the normal working week. The staffing level in the Fire Brigade, as of 31 March 2002, recorded the number of whole-time firefighters as 869. The establishment figure for the same date was 919.
The second component is the retained firefighters, who work when required. They are committed to two hours a week for drill purposes. A retained firefighter can expect remuneration at an hourly rate for attendance at fires and a Northern Ireland allowance. Their total pay before National Insurance and income tax ranges from one hour’s work at £15·17 to nine hours’ work at £64·77, which equates to £6·20 an hour. The job of a retained firefighter is classed as a part-time occupation. How long can we expect people to continue to be on call 24 hours a day, seven days a week, particularly as they must often take time out from their main jobs, and, therefore, incur financial losses by fighting fires? There were 910 retained firefighters on 31 March 2002, but the establishment figure for the same date is 980. This is in addition to the whole-time service level of 869 firefighters, making this essential service totally dependent on both whole-time and retained firefighters.
The third component is the control room staff. On 31 March 2002, 55 such staff were recorded, while the establishment figure for the same date was 59. These workers are expected to operate up-to-date equipment for salary scales from yesteryear. The pay structure dates from 1977 and is linked to the old male manual workers’ agreement, long since unacceptable for obvious reasons.
Today the Fire Service is linked to associated professional and armed technical groups of workers such as the police and armed forces: that is the right category for such an essential service. The problem is that their pay scales have not been brought into line. Something must be seriously wrong when a member of the Fire Service with 32 years’ service has a weekly wage of £300.
There are eight volunteer firefighters for Rathlin Island: the establishment figure is 12.
At 31 March 2002 there were 128 fewer firefighters than the established figure for the Northern Ireland Fire Service. A further 283 members of the service were in temporary positions, and a hot fire training unit at Boucher Crescent, Belfast, built in July 2001 at a cost of £56,000, was used just 28 times before being closed by Belfast City Council. Surely such resources could have been better used in resolving the pay dispute and creating better working conditions.
In my opening remarks I also referred to civil unrest. Up to 31 August 2002 the Fire Brigade, given its current circumstances, attended 500 calls, resulting in 84 appliances being damaged and many firefighters being hurt. That is the working environment these people have to endure: it is part of their ongoing conditions and must not be allowed to go underestimated. The Fire Brigades Union has spent considerable time and effort in trying to resolve the dispute. I ask the House to support this essential service in its efforts to ensure that those who have served their communities so well get the remuneration to which they are totally justified.

Ms Bairbre de Brún: Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. Tá mé buíoch den Uasal Paisley as an cheist thábhachtach seo a ardú. Aontaím ó chroí lena bhfuil ráite faoi obair luachmhar mhisniúil na dtrodaithe dóiteáin — cuireann siad a mbeatha i mbaol ar son na sochaí, agus caithfear seo a aithint mar is cuí.
Caithfidh mé seo a shoiléiriú ar dtús: déantar idirbheartaíocht ar arduithe pá do phearsanra na Seirbhíse Dóiteáin i gcomhar idir Ceardchumann na mBriogáidí Dóiteáin agus na fostóirí a dhéanann ionadaíocht thar ceann na mbriogáidí anseo agus sa Bhreatain Mhór. Ní bhíonn baint dhíreach agamsa ná ag mo Roinn leo.
Is chun leasa cách go gcomhaontaíonn fostóirí agus Ceardchumann na mBriogáidí Dóiteáin socrú cothrom ar an éileamh pá. Tá sé tábhachtach chomh maith, áfach, go mbíonn aon ardú pá d’fhoireann na Seirbhíse Dóiteáin réasúnta, tharla an brú ar chaiteachas poiblí, agus go socraítear é i gcomhthéacs an nuachóirithe agus an fheabhsúcháin.
Creideann Ceardchumann na mBriogáidí Dóiteáin go bhfuil méadú de 40% inchosanta, agus tá na fostóirí den tuairim gur féidir dámhachtainí suntasacha pá a nascadh le sochair shoiléire bhreise don phobal, agus gur chóir an nascadh sin a dhéanamh. Mar shampla, thaispeáin tuairiscí clár oibre nuachóirithe na bhfostóirí a ba mhaith leo é a bheith nasctha le hardú pá. Ar na rudaí a ba mhaith leo iad a bheith nasctha lena leithéid de ardú tá: tuilleadh béime ar shábháilteacht pobail agus ar laghdú riosca á tabhairt chun cinn i gcomhpháirtíocht leis an phobal agus fórsaí saothair dea-fheistithe, oilte fuinniúla a léiríonn a gcomhdhéanamh an éagsúlacht.
I thank Mr Paisley Jnr for bringing this important issue to the Floor of the House. I will begin by saying that I agree wholeheartedly with all that has been said about the valuable and courageous work of the firefighters. Every day they put their lives on the line for society, and this contribution must be recognised appropriately.
Members gave many clear indications and examples of the type of work that firefighters carry out: one talked of their role in attending road traffic accidents. My parents were killed in a road traffic accident in the South some years ago, and my family paid tribute to the local fire brigade that attended the scene. I was aware then, and I am today, of the harrowing scene that must have met them when they went to do their job.
At the outset I need to make it clear that pay rises for Fire Service personnel are negotiated jointly between the Fire Brigades Union and employers representing brigades here and in GB.
Neither my Department nor I have been involved directly. That stated, it is in everyone’s interests for the employers and the Fire Brigades Union to agree a fair settlement to the pay claim. However, it is also important that any pay rise for Fire Service staff is affordable given the current pressures on public spending and is set in the context of modernisation and improvement.
The Fire Brigades Union feels that a 40% pay increase is justified, and the employers have taken the view that significant pay awards can, and should, be linked to clear additional benefits for the public. For example, reports have outlined the employers’ modernising agenda that they would wish to see linked to wage increases, including an increased emphasis on community safety and risk reduction taken forward in partnership with communities and well equipped, skilful and highly motivated workforces whose compositions reflect diversity. Such aims could be furthered through greater flexibility in terms and conditions and through a pay structure that rewards Fire Service personnel on the basis of the specific additional skills, experience and competences that they have. I note here Mrs Iris Robinson’s views on the issue.
Appropriate pay can, and must, be one of the outcomes of a negotiation process that looks at the full range of issues affecting the Fire Service here and the services in GB. While the issue is not solely one of pay, Members must be clear about the implications of the 40% pay claim as it stands. While it is impossible to be definitive about the impact of such a claim in advance of the settlement, it is likely that it would lead to an increase in annual public expenditure of approximately £14 million, with an immediate increase in pension liabilities of £40 million in the first year. Were such a claim to be settled, it must be understood that the additional cost would have to be found from within the Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety’s budget. I do not need to remind Members of the many competing claims for available resources, so I hope that whatever Members resolve today will be reflected, if necessary, in their contributions to the upcoming Budget debate.
John Kelly and Monica McWilliams raised the issue of public sector pay comparisons. The salary of an 18-year-old trainee school leaver who joins as a firefighter here begins at around £18,500 and goes up to £21,000 during the four years of training. When a firefighter becomes qualified, his salary rises to approximately £22,800 a year. Direct comparisons are always difficult. For example, a nurse after earning a degree starts on an annual salary of £15,500 to £17,000. A teacher, who also requires a degree prior to entry, receives £17,600.
Firefighters’ pay must recognise the fact that they put their lives on the line. Similarly, paramedics often find themselves in the most difficult and dangerous of circumstances, as demonstrated by recent attacks. After at least three years’ training, a fully qualified paramedic here receives an annual salary of £19,000. Simplistic comparisons are often not appropriate, and this in no way undervalues the dangerous and important work of the Fire Service. I again remind Members that neither my Department nor I have been involved directly in the pay negotiations.
Sam Foster, David Ervine, Iris Robinson and others raised the attacks on firefighters. I want to take this opportunity to state again that these attacks on firefighters are completely unacceptable. The Fire Brigade has a working group, which includes members of the Fire Brigades Union, who are progressing their proposals through the authority’s appliances and equipment and health and safety committees.
In addition, my Department, together with the Fire Authority, the Ambulance Service and youth engagement organisations, has worked up proposals for funding a community outreach initiative. I will continue to press for funding for this important initiative, and I hope that all Members will join with me in doing everything that we can together to ensure that our firefighters and other public sector workers are allowed to go about their extremely valuable work without such attacks as we have seen recently.
I hope that the pay dispute can be resolved amicably during the current negotiations. It is important that we recognise the risk to life and property that would result from industrial action. I urge employers and the union to explore every avenue to avoid industrial action, and I appeal to firefighters to stay at the conference table to try to resolve their issues through discussion.

Ms Jane Morrice: I call Mr Hamilton to make a winding-up speech on amendment 3.

Rev Dr Ian Paisley: On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. I would like you to put to the Speaker a statement made in this debate by the Sinn Féin Member for Mid Ulster in which he used the word "traduce" in accusing Members of carrying out a criminal act, traducing people for their own financial benefits. I looked up the meaning of the word in the Library; it led to the beheading of Lady Jane Grey. It is a serious word, and it was used today about Members of my party. I request that when Hansard is printed you place the statement before the Speaker so that we can have a ruling.

Ms Jane Morrice: Thank you for that point of order. I will look carefully at Hansard and refer the matter to the Speaker.

Mr Tom Hamilton: I thank the Minister for her contribution. Although her Department does not have overall control of this matter, I welcome her desire that the matter be resolved during the current negotiations and that it should not end in strike action. That is the view of the whole House.
Many Members contributed to the debate, and that precludes me, in the five minutes allotted, from refering to what everyone said. If I leave any Member out, it is not intentional, and it is not because I do not think his comments worthy.
I welcome the comments of Dr Hendron, the Chairperson of the Committee for Health, Social Services and Public Safety, who referred to the courage of the Fire Service over the years and the experience and problems that arose when he was MP for West Belfast. The House will welcome his commitment that the Committee will continue to monitor the situation carefully.
Mr Boyd highlighted how the degree of professionalism required in the Fire Service has changed since the last pay award, and Iris Robinson expanded on that point in her worthwhile contribution. Sam Foster questioned the mindset of those who attack firemen, and Paul Berry drew a parallel between the esteem in which firemen are held in the United States and the treatment of the Fire Brigade by some people here. I welcome the support of Ivan Davis, who referred to the number of firefighters who lost their lives or were injured during the troubles.
Unfortunately, Alban Maginness has left the Chamber; I was struck by his welcome of the degree of consensus in the Chamber on the issue. He also drew attention to the penny-pinching attitude of the Government and compared the cost of the firemens’ claim to the money that could be spent in a war against Iraq.
This amendment makes the substantive motion more specific and more helpful to the firefighters in their struggle for fairer and better pay and conditions. That is Members’ ultimate objective. There is widespread public support for the firefighters and for what is seen as a deserving and long overdue pay review. Our amendment correctly reflects the majority of people’s thinking. It is not simply a call for a specific amount of pay; it addresses the underlying problem of the absence of a proper pay structure for ordinary firefighters, whose only hope of a real pay increase is to join the management ranks.
New pay scales should be introduced that recognise not only long service, but the expertise and skill of ordinary firefighters. That would create a proper pay and career structure, anchored not only in management, but in real firefighting skills — because firefighting is a skilled job. With guidance from the Fire Brigades Union’s representatives, those skills should be identified and recognised in the pay scales, which should be more diverse and more skills-related. That is the intelligent way to sort this problem in the long term. I commend the amendment to the House.

Mr David Ervine: It seems that everyone supports the firefighters but nobody wants them to get £30,000. It seems that we want to give them quite a bit, but not as much as £30,000. Several important issues have been raised, which are equally valid in their own way. John Kelly’s suggestion, mirrored by Ivan Davis, of a unified approach by the Assembly warrants significant thought. It is important that, even if we squabble at times before reaching the same decision, that approach is valuable and sends out the right message.
Alban Maginness struck me by identifying that the same Prime Minister who worries about what a pay rise for the Fire Service will do to the economy flew out to meet Perky. Pinky and Perky have together decided to bomb Iraq. Just as a Fire Service strike hits, Iraq is likely to be attacked. That will be interesting.
We must be mindful of the support that we give today when the spin doctors begin to operate in the event of a strike by the firefighters. What are we going to do? Are we going to defend ourselves and say to our constituents that it is perfectly right for the Fire Service to be on strike, or are we going to listen to those who will say that they are putting everyone at grave risk?
Paul Berry made the point that the most recent industrial action to be taken by the Fire Service was in 1978. These are not unreasonable, overly militant people. They ask to be taken seriously; however, when they were in negotiation with management, the Government, through the back door, stymied the possibility of a relationship being formed that would result in a decent sum of money for the Fire Service. That is a terrible circumstance, and signals, for all those in negotiations with managers, the point at which the Government might interfere.
As legislators, Members must consider that. Will the Assembly be tarred by the same brush? Our Ministers will soon be beseeched by various sectors of society for pay increases. What will the Assembly do then? Will it operate the same process as Tony Blair? That is one of the many factors in the debate that Members have not thought about.
This direct political involvement in a pay negotiation smacks of the miners’ dispute with Margaret Thatcher. It smacks of scrubbing the long-established circumstances in which management and trade unions could build relationships and create partnerships in the negotiations. That is being jeopardised by the British Government. Members must be mindful of that and take it on board. As the British Government screw down people’s wages, the Assembly will be expected to do the same. Given that our Ministers will have opinions on many areas of the wage sector, it is something that the Assembly must pay attention to.
It seems that there is some wisdom in the PUP’s withdrawing its amendment. However, I caution with this thought — the amendment tabled in my name could avert a strike if it were listened to. The amendment tabled by the Ulster Unionists could also avert a strike, but the motion and the other amendment could not. Members should think about the inimitable words of Eileen Bell, who said that the Government will probably not listen anyway. That means that there may be strike action by the firefighters.
Last thought — when the media is hounding and vilifying the Fire Service, let us all remember who supported it in this debate.

Ms Jane Morrice: Mr Ervine, will you clarify whether amendment No 1 is moved or not moved?

Mr David Ervine: The amendment is not moved.

Ms Jane Morrice: By leave of the Assembly, amendment No 1 is not moved.

Mr Jim Shannon: I thank Members for their comments. An obvious recurring theme has been that the job of a firefighter is unlike any other job in the country. Over the past thirty years they have had a job unlike those in any other fire service in the United Kingdom or the rest of the world.
If we are all saying that — and we seem to be — we should be asking ourselves whether firefighters are getting an adequate wage to reflect the risks that they take every day to ensure the survival of Members, their families and the people they represent. They are not. The Assembly has not agreed the wage that the firefighters should be paid, but Members have said that there should be flexibility in the wage negotiations. We should not be tied to £25,000 or £30,000. There should be flexibility to go upwards as well as downwards. There must be flexibility in the system to ensure that the firefighters get a maximum wage for the duties and the work that they do. That is why it is important that Members are on the same wavelength.
The Fire Service is one of the three backbone services in the Province. It contributes to the operation of a modern and progressive country, and that should be recognised. Members should be examining a wage that reflects that. Even after a 42-hour week, full-time firefighters are earning £100 less per week than the country’s average earnings. That must be reflected on and changed. The Assembly must ensure that firefighters get the wage that they are looking for. They have not had a wage increase since 1978.
Strike action has been mentioned. We cannot walk away from that.
The motion is not only for the benefit of the firefighters; it is for their families as well. Some firefighters are on a wage that depends on their families receiving working families’ tax credit. That applies to many firefighters, and it cannot be ignored. On the bar of equality, retained firefighters deserve a realistic wage — not in a couple of years when the Government decide to bring it in as an election gimmick to win votes, but now, when they need it.
The Prime Minister and John Prescott announced that there would be a review of salaries, but as the firefighters stated, they do not need a review — they need a pay rise. They do not need a review to tell them that they need more money, and that they need it immediately. We need that commitment to the firefighters. We need to see the money coming in rather than what we are seeing — the Government playing for time. There is a very real gap between firefighters’ pay scales and pay scales in the private sector. As under a previous Labour Government, the Fire Brigade, nurses and police feel that their only option is industrial action.
All the Members who have spoken today mentioned the need for the wage increase. My Colleague for Strangford, Iris Robinson MP, mentioned it, as did Tom Hamilton, Ivan Davis and Alban Maginness. David Ervine spoke very clearly about the need for a wage increase, and industrial action is something that the firefighters really have to consider.
The demonstration in Belfast was attended by firefighters from across the United Kingdom. One statement that stood out in that rally was
"A reasonable reward for a reasonable request."
If the firefighters needed a headline, I believe that is it. Members should try their best to ensure that they get a reasonable reward for a reasonable request. Let us not turn away from them in this time of need.
The jobs of the men and women of the Fire Service have changed greatly, and they are still the number one emergency service in many cases. As the firefighters have stated, they have stuck to an annual pay formula, which was agreed 25 years ago, and since then they have not asked for a pay increase. As the firefighters have not complained and have got on with the job in hand, they deserve the Assembly’s support for their loyalty and their determination to keep the Fire Service going under the obvious manpower and funding shortages that have dogged them since the 1980s. We must support their action, and we must think about them.
How would Members feel if after 30 years of service, injury, dedication and laying their lives on the line they were taking home pay of £280 per week — think of that when you vote! I urge Members to support the motion. I know they will support it, and I believe that the Minister and her Department will fight hard for the firefighters.
Question, 
Main Question, as amended, put and agreed to.
Resolved:
That this Assembly recognises the valuable and courageous work undertaken by the Fire Service and calls for the introduction of a new pay formula together with a commensurate level of pay for firefighters to ensure that these accurately reflect the highly skilled and professional role undertaken by firefighters and fire control staff.
Adjourned at 5.43 pm.